cP, 


^+%*»  t«u  -/*-*-*> 


Sr 


4  4  -  o 


JO 


LIBEAEY 


, 


Theological    Seminary, 

^        PRINCETON,    N.  J 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2011  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/americanlutherOOschm 


V 


i 


THE 


AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH, 


HISTORICALLY,  DOCTRINALLY,  AND  PRACTICALLY 


DELINEATED, 


II?    SEVERAL    OCCASIONAL    DISCOURSES: 


BY    S.    S.    SCHMUCKER,    D.   D ., 

PROFESSOR    OF    CHRISTIAN   THEOLOGY,   IN   THE    THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY    OF    TH3 
GENERAL    SYNOD,    GETTYSBDRG,    PA. 


SECOND  EDITION. 


SPRINGFIELD: 

PUBLISHED  BY  D.  HARBAUGB 
1851. 


Entered  according  to  act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  one  thou- 
sand, eight  hundred  and  fifty-one,  by  D.  Harbaugh  and  J.  B. 
Butler,  in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the 
United  States,  in  and  for  the  District  of  Ohio. 


GEO.    D.    EMERSON    &    CO. 

STEREOTYPERS. 
SPRINGFIELD,     OHIO. 


PREFACE. 

In  offering  this  work  to  the  public,  it  is  proper 
that  some  of  the  considerations  which  have  actua- 
ted the  publishers,  should  be  stated.  The  title  it- 
self is  significant  of  the  subject  on  which  it  treats. 
The  true  history,  real  character,  present  position, 
and  distinctive  features  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in 
the  world,  are  little  known,  often  misunderstood, 
and  sometimes  grossly  misrepresented  in  this 
country. 

Among  the  causes  which  may  be  assigned  for 
this,  we  mention  the  want  of  a  proper  knowledge 
of  Church  History  in  general,  and  of  Protestantism 
in  particular;  non-acquaintance  with  the  German 
language,  and,  it  is  to  be  feared,  denominational 
bigotry. 

The  Lutheran  Church  was  the  first  to  throw  off 
the  yoke  of  ecclesiastical  tyranny,  and  break  the 
scepter  of  religious  despotism;  to  maintain  the 
great  Protestant  principle,  that  the  Bible  is  the 
only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice ;  to  assert 
the  right  of  private  judgment  in  the  interpretation 


IV  PREFACE. 

of  the  Scriptures;  and  to  proclaim  the  doctrine  of 
Justification  by  Faith  alone,  as  the  foundation  of  a 
"standing  and  falling  church."  Her  institutions 
are  second  to  none  on  earth;  and  her  literature, 
embracing  every  subject  of  religious  inquiry,  is  the 
glory  of  Christendom,  furnishing  an  antidote  to 
false  philosophy  and  rationalism  on  the  one  hand, 
and  to  vulgar  infidelity  on  the  other. 

Her  fundamental  doctrines  are  those  of  the 
Reformation,  found,  in  their  essential  aspects,  in  all 
the  symbols  of  Protestantism. 

Her  peculiarities  place  her  in  a  medium  position 
in  Church  extremes — in  doctrine,  worship,  rites, 
and  government.  Her  territory  of  operation  is  ex- 
tended over  a  large  portion  of  the  globe,  embracing 
more  than  thirty  millions  of  human  beings,  consti- 
tuting nearly  one-half  of  Protestantism,  and  the 
hope  of  much  of  the  world. 

Her  history  is  intimately  interwoven  with  that 
of  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century,  fur- 
nishing lessons  of  wisdom  and  experience  to  in- 
struct and  encourage,  as  well  as  of  presumption 
and  folly  to  warn  and  rebuke.  All  God's  dealings 
with  her  should  teach  all  her  sons,  that  she  was 
planted,  watered,  and  preserved  by  Him. 

But  the  volume  before  us  treats  of  the  "  Ameri- 
can Lutheran  Church."  This  is  a  branch  of  the 
same  vine,  planted  here  more  than  a  century  ago, 
by  the  right  hand  of  the  Lord.     Although  labor- 


PREFACE.  V 

mg  under  many  disadvantages,  arising  from  the 
union  of  Church  and  State  in  Europe,  the  oppres- 
sions of  their  governments,  the  unsettled  state  of 
this  country,  and  the  want  of  a  knowledge  of  its 
language,  she  has  nevertheless  overcome  many  of 
them,  and  extended  herself  far  and  wide  over  our 
land.  The  number  of  her  ministers  and  member- 
ship has  been  doubled  every  fifteen  years,  by  natu- 
ral increase  and  immigration;  so  that  she  is  already 
in  number  the  third  Protestant  denomination  in  the 
United  States. 

Notwithstanding  all  this,  the  remark  made  at 
the  beginning  of  this  Preface  is  time,  that  much 
ignorance  exists,  and  constant  misrepresentations 
take  place,  relative  to  the  Lutheran  Church  in  the 
United  States.  Although  information  has  been 
spread  through  her  periodicals  and  publications,  in 
this  country,  there  is  none  in  which  so  full  and 
satisfactory  an  account  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
in  America  can  be  found  as  in  the  present  volume. 

The  First  Discourse  embraces  a  history  of  the 
rise  and  progress  of  the  Church  in  this  country. 

The  Second  presents  her  characteristic  features — 
the  peculiarities  by  which  she  is  distinguished  from 
other  branches  of  the  Protestant  family. 

The  Third  gives  a  biography  of  her  founders, 
here,  showing  us  the  extent  of  their  labors,  the 
soundness  of  their  doctrinal  views,  the  sincerity  of 
their  piety,  the  profundity  of  their  knowledge,  the 


Tl  PREFACE. 

wisdom  of  their  measures,  and  the  success  of  their 
labors. 

The  Fourth  discusses  the  nature  of  the  Saviour's 
presence  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  which  the  corpo- 
ral presence  of  Christ's  human  nature  is  denied, 
and  his  spiritual  presence,  according  to  his  divine 
nature,  is  maintained. 

The  Fifth  discusses  the  question  pertaining  to 
her  doctrinal  basis  and  ecclesiastical  position,  in 
this  country;  showing  that  it  is  neither  rigid  sym- 
bolism, binding  the  conscience  to  the  letter  of  every 
doctrine  and  statement  contained  in  the  whole  of 
the  symbolical  books,  nor  loose  latitudinarianism, 
discarding  all  creeds  but  the  adoption  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  Luther's  Smaller  Cate- 
chism, as  teaching  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
the  word  of  God,  "in  a  manner  substantially 
correct." 

The  Sixth  points  out  her  vocation,  calling  upon 
her  to  realize  her  obligations,  to  take  warning  from 
past  errors,  to  guard  against  present  ^dangers,  to 
develope  her  various  resources,  to  advance  her  spir- 
itual interests,  and  to  extend  her  blessings  to  all 
her  children. 

The  Author,  the  Rev.  Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker,  has 
been,  for  twenty  years,  Professor  of  Theology  in 
the  Theological  Seminary  at  Gettysburg,  Pennsyl- 
vania.    In  the  Lutheran  Church  he  is  extensively 


PREFACE.  Yli 

and  favorably  known ;  and  no  man  in  this  country 
has  done  more  than  he  to  elevate  her  character, 
and  to  advance  her  welfare.  As  a  writer,,  he  is 
able  and  clear.  His  style  is  chaste  and  easy,  and 
his  arguments  strong  and  convincing.  His  "  Fra- 
ternal Appeal"  to  the  American  churches  on  Chris- 
tian union,  is  a  master-piece,  which,  with  his  other 
theological  and  philosophical  works,  has  made  him 
extensively  known,  beyond  the  bounds  of  his  own 
church,  both  in  America  and  England. 

We  deem  it  proper  to  state,  that  the  Author 
has  no  pecuniary  interest  in  the  appearance  of 
these  Discourses,  having  given  his  consent  gra- 
tuitously to  their  republication.  To  render  the 
work  more  acceptable,  we  have  inserted  his  like- 
ness, having  had  it  engraved  expressly  for  this 
volume. 

In  the  hope  that  it  may  awaken,  among  Luther- 
ans, a  stronger  attachment  to  their  church,  and 
draw  forth  their  benevolence  in  supplying  her 
wants ;  give  correct  information  to  all  who  may  de- 
sire to  become  better  acquainted  with  the  Ameri- 
can shoot  of  the  trunk  of  Protestantism;  strength- 
en the  hands  of  our  self-denying  ministers  in  all 
their  trials;  and  encourage  the  hearts  of  many  of 
our  people,  who  are  yet  destitute,  and  as  sheep 
without  a  shepherd  ;  we  send  it  forth,  praying 
that   the   Great   Head   of    the    Church,   without 


yiii  PREFACE. 

whose  favor  nothing  can  prosper,  would  own  and 
bless  it  to  the  sanctification  and  salvation  of 
many  souls. 

D.  HARBAUGH, 
J.  B.  BUTLER. 
Springfield,  Ohio,  August,  1851. 


CONTENTS. 


I.    DISCOURSE. 

RETROSPECT  OF  LUTHERANISM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES.  A  DIS- 
COURSE DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD  AT  BALTI- 
MORE, 1841 ;  AND  PUBLISHED  BY  SAID  BODY  FOR  GRATUITOUS 
DISTRIBUTION, 11 


II.    DISCOURSE, 

PORTRAITURE  OF  LUTHERANISM.  A  DISCOURSE  DELIVERED  BY 
REQUEST,  AT  THE  CONSECRATION  OF  THE  FIRST  ENGLISH 
LUTHERAN  CHURCH  IN  PITTSBURG,  OCT.  4,  1840,  BEFORE  THE 
SYNOD  OF  WEST  PENNSYLVANIA,  AND  PUBLISHED  BY  A  RESO- 
LUTION OF  SAID  BODY, 41 


III.    DISCOURSE. 

THE  PATRIARCHS  OF  AMERICAN  LUTHERANISM  ;  BEING  A  DIS- 
COURSE DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE  HISTORICAL  SOCIETY  OF 
THE  LUTHERAN  CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES,  DURING  THE 
SESSION  OF  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD  IN  PHILADELPHIA,  MAY  17, 
1845,  AND  PUBLISHED  BY  SAID  SOCIETY, 90 


i  CONTEXTS. 

IV.     DISCOURSE. 

THE  NATURE  OF  THE  SAVIOUR'S  PRESENCE  IN  THE  EUCHARIST  ; 
NOW  FIRST  PUBLISHED, 120 


V.    DISCOURSE. 

THE   DOCTRINAL  BASIS    AND  ECCLESIASTICAL   POSITION  OF  THE 
AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH, 155 


VI.    DISCOURSE. 

VOCATION  OF  THE  AMERICAN   LUTHERAN  CHURCH;    NOW  FIRST 
PUBLISHED, 247 


-     '■ 


THE 


AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH, 


I.    DISCOURSE. 

RETROSPECT  OF  LUTHERANISM  IN  THE  UNITED 
STATES. 

Remember  the  days  of  old,  consider  the  years  of  many  gener- 
ations, ask  thy  father  and  he  will  show  thee,  thy  elders  and 
they  will  tell  thee. — Deut.  xxxii.  7. 

Man,  my  brethren,  we  are  told  in  the  good  book  of  God, 
is  wonderfully  and  fearfully  constructed.  This  is  true  not 
only  of  the  tenement  of  clay  which  we  inhabit,  but  far  more 
illustriously  true  of  the  immortal  mind,  which  mainly  con- 
stitutes ourself.  Possessed  of  powers  of  cognition,  of  feeling 
and  of  action,  man  is  adapted  for  the  high  destiny  marked 
out  by  the  Almighty,  for  a  sphere  little  lower  than  that  of 
angels,  encircled  with  honor  and  glory.  As  he  journeys 
through  life,  he  is  surrounded  on  all  sides  by  a  certain  ex- 
tent of  intellectual  vision,  which,  like  the  torch  of  the  be- 
nighted traveler,  forms  a  circle  of  illumination  around  him, 
in  which  he  can  safely  direct  his  steps.  His  powers  of  cog- 
nition embrace  a  knowledge  of  the  present,  some  certainties- 
commingled  with  many  probabilities  in  the  future,  and  co- 
pious reminiscences  of  the  past.  The  past  is  our  richest  and 
most  instructive  teacher ;  and  it  was  justly  said  by  one  of 
the  most  brilliant  intellects  of  heathen  antiquity,  that  not  to 
know  what  happened  before  we  were  born  is  to  remain  al- 
ways a  child,     This  power  of  retrospection  sheds  its  influ.- 


T2  RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHER AKISM. 

once  on  every  department  of  human  life — on  our  social,  our 
intellectual,  and  our  religious  interests. 

It  is  in  this  field  of  retrospection  that  the  Christian  finds 
many  of  his  dearest  social  enjoyments.  Fond  memory  de- 
lights to  dwell  on  the  pleasing*  and  interesting  associations  of 
our  early  years,  especially  associations  of  effort  in  the  cause 
of  the  Redeemer.  And  it  is  here,  too,  that  "  pensive  memory 
retraces  scenes  of  bliss  forever  fled,"  it  is  here  she  "dwells 
in  former  times  and  places;"  it  is  here  she  "holds  com- 
munion with  the  dead."  On  this  occasion,  my  brethren,  these 
feelings  rise  commingled  in  my  breast,  when  I  see  before 
me  some  of  those  beloved  brethren,  with  whom  I  shared 
the  toils  of  early  ministerial  life,  and  when  I  fail  to  see  others, 
who  twenty  years  ago  were  co-workers  with  us,  but  have 
gone  to  their  rest. 

It  is  in  the  wide  field  of  retrospection,  that  we  gather  our 
richest  treasures  of  wisdom  and  experience.  It  is  memory 
that  enables  us  to  appropriate  to  ourselves  the  knowledge  and 
experience  of  past  ages  ;  to  hold  communion  with  apostles 
and  prophets  and  patriarchs,  and  virtually  to  extend  our  life 
from  threescore  to  a  thousand  years.  It  is  in  the  rich  fields 
of  retrospection,  too,  that  the  Christian  finds  the  incidents, 
the  principles,  and  many  of  the  evidences  of  his  holy  re- 
ligion ;  the  glorious  displays  of  Divine  Providence,  and  the 
heavenly,  the  expansive  power  of  that  gospel,  which,  aided 
by  the  Spirit,  serves  in  every  age  as  the  conductor  of  saving 
influences  from  heaven  to  man.  In  the  Old  Testament 
church,  festivals  were  expressly  appointed  to  cherish  the 
memory  of  God's  mercies  to  his  people.  And  our  blessed 
Saviour  himself  not  only  attended  those  festivals,  instituted 
by  Moses,  but  appointed  a  mnemonic  rite  in  his  own  church, 
and  seems  not  to  have  disregarded  the  feast  of  dedication 
which  was  of  mere  human  appointment.     John  x.  22. 

But  it  is  not  only  in  the  Old  Testament  dispensation  that 
the  hand  of  Providence  and  the  power  of  God's  word  may 
be  recognized.  They  are  displayed  with  increased  lustre  in 
the  developments  of  the  New  Testament  church  throughout 
her  history.  They  are  seen  in  the  Reformation  of  the  six- 
teenth century,  when,  after  ages  of  concealment  beneath  the 
dust  of  ignorance  and  superstition,  the  seed  of  the  word  was 
brought  to  light  and  scattered  among  the  people.  They  are 
seen  in  the  history  of  Pietism  in  Germany,  of  the  Methodist 


RETROSPECT    OP    LUTHER ANISM.  13 

church,  the  Presbyterian,  the  Episcopal  and  other  churches, 
and,  we  ma)'  add,  in  the  History  of  our  Lutheran  Zion  in 
these  United  States.  Here,  too,  the  precious  seed  scattered 
abroad  by  a  few  able  and  faithful  servants  of  Christ,  was 
richly  watered  by  the  Spirit,  and  produced  abundant  fruit  to 
the  praise  of  his  grace ;  and  here,  too,  there  are  abundant 
materials  for  the  recognition  of  his  Providence. 

More  than  two  hundred  years  have  rolled  away  since  the 
first  disciples  of  Christ  bearing  the  name  of  Luther,  trav- 
ersed the  mighty  deep  to  seek  a  resting-place  in  thisWestern 
world.  For  more  than  a  century  has  an  uninterrupted 
stream  of  immigration  continued  to  swell  their  numbers. 
Various  and  interesting  and  instructive  are  the  incidents 
which  have  since  transpired  ;  and  as  the  improvement  of 
such  incidents  is  often  enjoined  in  scripture,  it  may  be  well 
for  us  to  adopt  the  language  of  Moses,  when  about  to  bid 
adieu  to  his  brethren  after  the  flesh  :  "Remember  the  days  of 
old,  consider  the  years  of  many  generations,  ask  thy  father  and 
he  will  show  thee,  thy  elders  and  they  will  tell  thee.'y  This 
will  be  the  more  appropriate  as  we  are  assembled  to  delib- 
erate on  the  welfare  of  the  church  at  large,  and  especially 
as  we  are  on  the  eve  of  a  centenary  celebration,  for  which 
we  are  expected  to  make  arrangements.  It  would,  indeed, 
be  more  grateful  to  the  feelings  of  the  speaker,  and  we  trust 
of  those  who  hear  him,  if  the  contemplated  celebration  per- 
tained to  the  body  of  Christ  at  large,  and  not  only  to  one 
branch  of  it ;  yet  if  all  invidious  comparison  be  avoided,  if 
with  our  reminiscences  of  the  goodness  of  God  to  our  Zion, 
we  forget  not  his  mercies  to  others,  and  cherish  a  deep  sense 
of  our  unprofitableness  ;  in  short,  if  the  spirit  of  secta-r 
rianism  be,  as  I  trust  it  will  be,  excluded  from  the  celebration, 
it  may  tend  to  the  glory  of  that  Redeemer,  who  would  have 
all  his  disciples  regard  each  other  as  brethren,  whilst  they 
acknowledge,  as  their  one  and  only  Master,  neither  Luther, 
nor  Zuingle,  nor  Calvin,  nor  Wesley,  but  Jesus  Christ. 
With  these  views  we  invite  your  attention  to 

A    RETROSPECT    OF     THE     LUTHERAN     CHURCH     IN    THE     UNITED.) 
STATES. 

We  shall 

I.  Glance  at  the  history  itself ;  and, 

II.  Consider  several  particular  topics  connected  with  it 

2 


14  RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHE  R  A  N  IS  M. 

The  history  of  this  portion  of  Christ's  kingdom  naturally 
divides  itself  into  three  periods.  The  I.  may  be  termed 
the  Colonial  Era,  extending  from  the  first  settlement  of  Lu- 
therans in  this  country,  (about  1626,)  to  the  Declaration  of 
American  Independence  in  1776,  and  embraces  about  one 
hundred  and  fifty  years.  The  II.  extends  from  that  period, 
to  the  establishment  of  the  General  Synod,  in  1820,  includ- 
ing forty-four  years.  This  may  be  regarded  as  the  middle 
era;  and  the  III.  from  that  period  to  the  present  time,  which 
may  be  styled  the  era  of  the  General  Synod,  and  includes 
twenty  years. 

I.    THE    COLONIAL    ERA. 

The  earliest  settlement  of  Lutherans  in  this  country,  was 
made  by  emigrants  from  Holland  to  New  York,  soon  after 
the  first  establishment  of  the  Dutch  in  that  city,  then  called 
New  Amsterdam,  which  was  in  1621.  This  fact,  which  is 
ef  some  historical  interest,  rests  upon  the  authority  of  the 
venerable  patriarch  of  American  Lutheranism,  Henry  Mel- 
chior  Muhlenberg.  '*  As  I  was  detained  at  New  York,  (says 
he  in  his  Report  to  Halle,1)  I  took  some  pains  to  acquire 
correct  information  concerning  the  history  of  the  Lutheran 
church  in  that  city.  This  small  congregation  took  its  rise 
almost  at  the  first  settlement  of  the  country.  Whilst  the  ter- 
ritory yet  belonged  to  Holland,  the  few  Low  Dutch  Lu- 
therans were  compelled  to  hold  their  worship  in  private  ; 
but  after  it  passed  into  the  possession  of  the  British,  in  1664, 
liberty  was  granted  them  by  all  the  successive  governors  to 
conduct  their  worship  publicly  without  any  obstruction."2 
The  establishment  of  Lutherans  was,  therefore,  made  little 
more  than  a  century  after  the  re-discovery  of  America  by 

(1)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  360. 

(2)  The  Lutheran  Herald,  vol.  in,  No.  1,  gives  us  the  following  particulars : 
"  Indeed,  so  great  was  the  number  of  Lutherans,  even  at  this  time,  that  the 
very  next  year,  1665,  after  the  English  flag  had  been  displayed  from  fort 
Amsterdam,  they  petitioned  for  liberty  to  send  to  Germany  a  call  for  a 
regular  pastor.  This  petition  Governor  Nicols  of  course  granted,  and  in 
February,  1669,  two  years  after  he  had  left  the  government,  the  Rev. 
Jacobus  Fabricius  arrived  in  the  colony  and  began  his  pastoral  labors." 
"On  the  13th  of  October,  1669,  Lord  Lovelace,  who  had  succeeded  Gov. 
Nicols  publicly  proclaimed  his  having  received  a  letter  from  the  Duke  of 
York,  expressing  his  pleasure  that  the  Lutherans  should  be  tolerated." 


RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHERAN  ISM.  15 

Columbus,  in  1492  ;!  within  a  few  years  of  the  landing  of 
the  Pilgrims  on  Plymouth  rock,  1620,  and  whilst  the  Thirty 
Years'  War2  was  raging  in  Germany,  and  threatening  to 
exterminate  Protestantism  from  Europe.  Their  first  minister 
was  Jacob  Fabricius,  who  arrived  in  1669,  but  after  eight 
years'  labor,  left  them  and  connected  himself  with  the  Swed- 
ish Lutherans.3  The  names  of  his  immediate  successors  we 
have  not  found  ;  but  from  1703  to  1747,  their  pastors  were 
the  Rev.  Messrs.  Falkner ;  from  1703  till  1725,  Berkenmayer, 
and  Knoll,  and  subsequently  Pvochemdahler,  Wolf,  Hart- 
wick  and  others.  The  first  church  (a  log  building,)  was 
erected  1671,4  and  Mr.  Muhlenberg  says  it  was  in  a  dilapi- 
dated state  when  it  was  taken  down  and  its  place  supplied 
by  one  of  stone,5  in  the  time  of  Mr.  Berkenmayer.  The 
cause  of  the  emigration  from  Holland  we  have  not  seen 
stated,  but  it  may  easily  be  conjectured,  as  the  emigrants 
left  that  country  a  few  years  after  the  famous  Synod  of  Dort 
(1618,)  and  whilst  the  government  was  enforcing  the  intoler- 
ant decrees  of  that  body. 

To  this  settlement  succeeded  that  of  the  Swedes  on  the 
Delaware,  in  1636,  about  ten  or  twelve  years  after  that  in 
New  Amsterdam,  and  sixteen  years  after  the  arrival  of  the 
pilgrims  at  Plymouth.  This  colony  was  first  contemplated 
during  the  reign  of  Gustavus  Adolphus,  and  was  sanctioned 
by  that  enlightened  and  illustrious  king.  It  was  delayed  by 
the  commencement  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War  in  Germany ; 
but  after  Sweden's  noble-hearted  monarch  had  poured  out 
his  life's-blood  on  the  plains  of  Lutzen,  it  was  revived  and 
executed  under  the  auspices  of  his  distinguished  prime  min- 

(1)  It  is  now  fully  established  that  America  was  not  first  discovered  by  Co- 
lumbus ;  but  Greenland  had  been  visited  by  Eirck,  the  Red,  and  New  Eng- 
land by  Biarni  Heriulphson,  the  former  in  982,  the  latter  in  985.  See 
Discoveries  of  the  North  Men. 

(2)  This  most  memorable  of  all  the  wars  in  the  history  of  Protestantism, 
which  deluged  Germany  in  blood,  and  had  it  not  been  for  the  magnanimous 
aid  of  Gustavus  Adolphus  and  his  brave  Swedes,  would  perhaps  have  extir- 
pated Protestantism  from  the  earth,  was  commenced  in  1618  and  ended  ill 
1648. 

(3)  Clay's  Annals,  &c,  p.  150.  Fabricius  took  charge  of  the  Swedish 
church  at  Wicaco,  now  Southwark,  Philadelphia,  where  he  labored  four- 
teen years,  during  nine  of  which  he  was  blind.     He  died  1692. 

(4)  Lutheran  Herald,  vol.  iii.  p.  51.     (5)  Halliche  Nachrichten,  p.  363. 


16  RETROSPECT    OF    LIT  THE  RANIS  M. 

ister,  Oxenstiern.1  For  many  years  this  colony  prospered, 
but  receiving  no  accessions  from  the  parent  country,  it  never 
increased  much  in  numbers ;  the  rising  generation  com- 
mingled with  the  surrounding  English  and  Germans,  and  at 
the  present  day  the  Swedish  language  is  entirely  abandoned 
in  their  worship.  For  many  years  their  ministers,  who 
were  generally  men  of  sterling  character,  were  in  habits  of 
the  most  friendly  intercourse  and  ecclesiastical  co-operation 
with  their  German  Lutheran  brethren  ;  but  the  prevalence 
of  the  English  language  having  early  placed  them  under 
obligation  to  our  Episcopal  brethren,  who  supplied  them  with 
ministrations  in  that  language,  these  churches,  three  or  four 
in  number,  have  successively  fallen  into  Episcopal  hands.2 

The  third  settlement  of  Lutherans  in  this  country  was 
that  of  the  Germans,  which  gradually  spread  over  Pennsyl- 
vania, Maryland,  Virginia  and  the  interior  of  New  York  and 
the  Western  States.  The  grant  of  Pennsylvania  was  given 
to  Penn  by  Charles  II.  in  1680,  and  from  this  date,  till  about 
twenty  years  afterward,  many  hundreds  of  families  emigrated 
to  Pennsylvania.  The  tide  of  German  emigration,  however, 
fairly  commenced  in  1710,  when  about  three  thousand  Ger- 
mans, chieliy  Lutheran,  oppressed  by  Romish  intolerance, 
went  from  the  Palatinate  to  England  in  1709,  and  were  sent 
by  Queen  Ann  to  New  York  the  succeeding  year.  In  1713 
one  hundred  and  fifty  families  settled  in  Schoharie  ;  and  in 
1717,  welind  in  the  Colonial  Records  of  Pennsylvania,  that 
the  Governor  of  the  province  felt  it  his  duty  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  ''Provincial  Council"  to  the  fact,  "that  great 
numbers  of  foreigners  from  Germany,  strangers  to  our  lan- 
guage and  constitution,  had  lately  been  imported  into  the 
province."  The  council  enacted  that  every  master  of  a  ves- 
sel should  report  the  emigrants  he  brought  over,  and  that 
they  should  all  repair  to  Philadelphia  within  one  month  to  take 
the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  government,3  that  it  might  be 
seen  whether  they  were  "friends  or  enemies  to  his  majesty's 

(1)  Clay's  Annals  of  the  Swedes,  p.  1G. 

(2)  That  these  churches  have  dwindled  away  to  almost  nothing,  would  seem 
to  appear  from  the  fact  that  when  their  present  amiable  rector,  the  Rev.  J. 
C.  Clay,  was  elected,  December  5th.  1831,  the  entire  number  of  votes  given, 
%as,  at  the  "VYicaeo  church  (Philadelphia,)  16,  at  Upper  Mcrion  29,  and  at 
Kiiigsessiiig37.     Clay's  Annals  p.  133. 

(3)  Colonial  Records,  vol,  iii  p  18. 


RETROSPECT    OP    LUTHERANISM.  17 

government."  In  1727,  the  year  memorable  alike  for 
Francke's  death  and  the  origin  of  the  Moravians,  a  very 
large  number  of  Germans  came  to  Pennsylvania  from  the 
Palatinate  from  Wurtemberg,  Darmstadt  and  other  parts  of 
Germany.  This  colony  was  long  destitute  of  a  regular  min- 
istry ;  there  were  however  some  schoolmasters  and  others, 
some  of  whom  were  probably  good  men,  who  undertook  to 
preach  ;  and  as  many  of  the  emigrants  brought  with  them 
the  spirit  of  true  piety  from  Germany,  they  brought  also 
many  devotional  books,  and  often  read  Arndt's  True  Chris- 
tianity and  other  similar  works  for  mutual  edilication.1  For 
twelve  years,  from  1730  till  the  arrival  of  the  patriarch  of 
American  Lutheranism,  Dr.  Henry  Melchior  Muhlenberg, 
the  Swedish  ministers  kindly  labored  among  the  Germans, 
as  far  as  their  duties  to  their  own  churches  admitted.  But 
before  we  pursue  the  history  of  this  colony  any  farther,  our 
attention  is  claimed  by 

The,  fourth  settlement  of  Lutherans  in  this  country,  who 
established  themselves  irfGeorgia,  in  1733,  and  to  designate 
the  gratitude  -of  their  hearts  to  the  God  who  had  protected 
them,  styled  their  location  Ebenezer.  These  emigrants 
were  from  Saltzburg,  formerly  belonging  to  Bavaria,  and 
restored  to  the  Austrian  dominions  at  the  peace  of  1814. 
Persecuted  at  home  by  those  enemies  of  all  righteousness, 
the  Jesuits,2  and  by  Romish  priests  and  Romish  rulers,  this 
band  of  disciples  sought  a  resting-place  in  these  western 
wilds,  where  they  could  worship  God  according  to  the 
dictates  of  their  consciences,  under  their  own  vine  and  fig- 
tree,  without  molestation  or  fear.  Through  the  instrument- 
ality of  Rev.  Urlsperger,  of  Augsburg,  who  was  a  corres- 
ponding member  of  the  British  Society  for  the  Promotion  of 
Christianity,  pecuniary  aid  was  afforded  by  that  liberal  and 
noble-minded  association,  and  the  oppressed  Saltzburgers  en- 
abled to  reach  the  place  of  their  destination.  Happily,  they 
were  immediately  supplied  by  two  able  and  faithful  pastors, 
Messrs.  Bolzius  and  Gronau.  The  latter  was  taken  away  by 
death  after  twelve  years  labor  among  the  emigrants,  but 
Bolzius  was  spared  to  the  church  about  thirty  years.  In 
1738  these  colonists  erected  an  orphan  house  at  Ebenezer, 

(1)  See  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  665,    (2)  Heinsius'  unparteiiscli  Kir* 
chen  historie,  vol.  hi.  p.  291. 
2A 


;8  RETROSPECT    OP    LUTrfEHAfllSM. 

to  which  work  of  benevolence  important  aid  was  contributed 
by  that  distinguished  man  of  God,  George  Whitelield,  who 
also  furnished  the  bell  for  one  of  the  churches  erected  by 
them.  The  descendants  of  these  colonists  are  still  numer- 
ous, and  are  connected  with  the  Lutheran  synod  of  South 
Carolina  and  adjacent  states. 

Soon  after  the  above  colonization,  numerous  Germans 
coming  from  Pennsylvania  and  other  states,  settled  in  North 
Carolina,1  who  enjoyed  the  labors  of  many  excellent  ser^ 
vants  of  Christ — Nussman,  Arndt,  Storch,  Roschen,  Bern- 
hard,  Shober  and  others,  and  whose  descendants  constitute 
the  present  numerous  churches  in  the  Carolinas. 

In  1735  a  settlement  of  Lutherans  was  formed  in  Spottsyl- 
vania,  as  Virginia  was  then  sometimes  called,2  which  we 
suppose  to  be  the  church  in  Madison  county  of  that  state. 
Their  pastor,  the  Rev.  Stoever,  visited  Germany  for  aid, 
and  together  with  several  assistants  obtained  three  thou- 
sand pounds,  part  of  which  was  expended  in  the  erection 
of  a  church,  the  purchase  of  a  plantation  and  slaves  to 
work  it  for  the  support  of  their  minister,  and  the  balance 
expended  for  a  library,  or  consumed  by  the  expenses  of  the 
town.2  As  might  have  been  expected,  this  church  seems 
never  to  have  enjoyed  the  smiles  of  our  Father  in  Heaven. 

In  1739  a  few  Germans,  emigrated  to  Waldoborough, 
Maine,  to  whose  number  an  addition  of  fifteen  hundred  souls 
was  made  thirteen  years  afterward.  But  the  title  to  the  land 
given  them  by  General  Waldo  proving  unsound,  many  left 
the  colony,  and  its  numbers  have  never  greatly  increased. 
For  many  years  they  enjoyed  the  pastoral  labors,  success- 
ively of  Rev.  SchaeiFer  (from  1762,)  Croner  (from  1785,) 
and  Ritz,  and  since  1811  are  under  the  charge  of  Rev.  Mr. 
Starman.3 

Of  all  these  colonies  that  which  in  the  Providence  of  God 
has  most  increased,  and  has  hitherto  constituted  the  great 
body  of  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  country,  is  that  in  the 

(1)  Shober's  Luther,  p.  137.     (2)  Ilallische  Nachrichten,  p.  331. 

(3)  Heinsius  speaks  of  a  colony  of  Swiss  Lutherans,  who  tired  of  Romish 
oppression,  also  sought  refuge  in  this  Western  world.  They  came  by  way 
of  England,  under  the  direction  of  Col.  Parry,  who  established  them  in  a 
place  called  after  himself  Purrysburg.  This  colony,  if  we  mistake  not, 
was  also  in  Georgia,  but  we  have  notbeen  able  to  find  any  account  of  its 
progress  or  present  condition.     Heinsius'  Kirchcugeschichte,  vol.  hi.  p.  291. 


RETROSPECT    OP    LUTHE R ASIS  M.  19 

Middle  states,  Pennsylvania,  interior  New  York,  Maryland, 
<fec,  whose  history  was  traced  in  its  proper  place  till  1742, 
This  was  a  memorable  year  for  the  Lutheran  church.  It 
was  signalized  by  the  arrival  of  Henry  Melchior  Muhlen- 
berg, whose  high  intellectual  and  moral  qualifications,  whose 
indefatigable  zeal  and  long  life  of  arduous  and  enlightened 
labor  for  the  Master's  cause,  constitute  a  new  era  in  the  his- 
tory of  our  American  Zion,  and  justly  entitle  him  to  the  ap- 
pellation of  patriarch  of  the  American  Lutheran  church. 
There  had  indeed  been  Lutherans  in  Pennsylvania  sixty 
years  earlier.  There  had  been  churches  built  at  New  Han- 
over, and  near  Lebanon  (the  Eergkirche,)  where  the  Rev. 
Stover  labored  in  1733,  and  at  York  in  1734.  In  Philadel- 
phia also  the  Lutherans  had  worshipped  jointly  with  their 
Reformed  brethren  in  an  old  log  house  in  Arch  street.  But 
in  general  they  had  enjoyed  no  regular  ministry,  until  1742, 
Muhlenberg  came  to  this  country  with  qualifications  of  the 
highest  order.  His  education  was  of  the  very  first  char- 
acter. In  addition  to  his  knowledge  of  Greek  and  Hebrew, 
he  spoke  English,  German,  Holland,  French,  Latin  and  Swe- 
dish. But  what  was  still  more  important,  he  was  edu- 
cated in  the  school  of  Francke,  and  had  imbibed  a  large 
portion  of  his  heavenly  spirit.  Like  Paul,  he  had  an  ardent 
zeal  for  the  salvation  of  "his  brethren,  his  kinsmen  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh."  He  first  landed  in  Georgia,  and  spent  a 
week  with  the  brethren,  Bolzius  and  Gronau,  to  refresh  his 
spirit  and  learn  the  circumstances  of  the  country;  and  then 
pursuing  his  course  by  a  dangerous  coasting  voyage,  in  a 
small  and  insecure  sloop,1  which  had  no  accommodations 
for  passengers,  he  arrived  in  Philadelphia,  Nov.  25,  1742. 
Having  reached  his  place  of  destination,  and  surmounted 
the  opposiiion  of  Count  Zinzendorf,  who,  under  the  assumed 
name  of  Thurnstein,  had  passed  himself  off  as  a  Lutheran 
minister  and  inspector,2  he  was  cordial^  received,  and  en- 

(1)  During  this,  voyage  all  on  board  endured  many  privations;  and  being 
delayed  and  tossed  about  by  contrary  winds,  suffered  much  for  want  of  water, 
So  great  was  the  destitution  of  wafer,  that  even  the  rais  ate  out  the  stoppers 
of  the  vinegar  bottles,  and  by  inserting  their  tails,  extracted  the  cooling 
liquid,  and  drew  them  through  their  mouths.  And  some  of  these  animals 
wee  also  seen  licking  the  perspiration  from  the  foreheads  of  the  sleeping 
mariners.     Hallisehe  Xachrichten.  p.  9. 

(2)  The  writer  has  in  his  library  a  volume  of  sermons  published  in  Bud- 
ingen  1746.  evidently  by  Count  Zinzendorf,  in  which  the  writer  on  the  titlu 


SO  RETROSPECT    OF    LUT  HE  R  AT?  IS  M. 

tered  on  his  labors  with  comprehensive  and  well-directed 
views  for  the  benefit  of  the  whole  church.  He  continued 
to  labor  for  near  a  half  a  century,  with  indefatigable  zeal. 
Whilst  Edwards  was  co-operating  with  the  extraordinary 
outpourings  of  God's  spirit  in  New  England,  and  the  Wes- 
leys  were  laboring  to  revive  vital  godliness  in  England ; 
whilst  Whitefield  was  doing  the  same  work  in  England  and 
America,  and  the  successors  of  Francke  were  laboring  to 
evangelize  Germany  ;  Muhlenberg  was  striving  with  similar 
zeal  and  fidelity  to  do  the  work  of  God  among  his  German 
brethren  in  this  Western  world.  Of  him,  as  also  of  some 
of  his  earliest  associates,  it  may  be  truly  said,  that,  "  he  was 
in  journeyings  often,  in  perils  of  waters,  in  perils  of  robbers, 
in  perils  by  his  own  countrymen,  in  perils  by  the  heathen, 
in  perils  in  the  city,  in  perils  in  the  wilderness,  in  perils  in 
the  sea,  in  perils  among  false  •  brethren,  in  weariness  and 
pain  fulness,  in  watchings  often,  in  hunger  and  thirst,  in  fast- 
ings often,  and  in  cold  and  nakedness."  He  preached  in 
season  and  out  of  season,  in  churches,  in  dwellings,  in  barns 
and  in  the  open  air,  until  at  last  that  divine  Master,  whom 
he  so  faithfully  served,  received  him  into  the  society  of  the 
apostles  and  prophets  at  his  right  hand. 

Such  was  Muhlenberg.  Throughout  his  long  life  he  was 
regarded  by  all  as  the  leader  of  the  Lutheran  phalanx,  as 
the  father -of  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  country.  Although 
we  see  no  necessity  for  attaching  a  season  of  grateful  ac- 
knowledgment of  the  Divine  goodnes,  to  any  specific  date, 
as  it  is  at  all  times  proper ;  yet  if  such  a  date  be  sought, 
no  one  more  appropriate  could  be  found  than  the  year  of 
Muhlenberg's  call  to  this  work,  (September,  1741,  j1  or  his 
actual  arrival  in  this  country  in  1742. 

Muhlenberg  was  soon  joined  in  the  American  field  by 
other  highly  respectable  men,  of  excellent  education  and  of 
spirit  like  his  own  ;  the  greater  part  of  whom  were  in  like 
manner  sent  from  Germany,  such  as  Brunnholtz  and  Lemke, 
1745;  Handshuh,  Hartwick,  the  generous  founder  of  the 
seminary  that  bears  his  name,  and  Weygand,  1748  ;  Hein- 
zelman  and  Schultz,  1751;  Gerock,  Hausil,  Wortman,  Wa^- 


page  is  represented  to  have  Leen  Lutheran  Inspector  and  Pastor  in  Phils 
delphia  in  1742. 

(1)  Ilaliisehe  Nachrichten;  p.  7. 


RETROSPECT    OP    LUTHER  A  MS  M.  21 

ner,  Schartlin,  Shrenk  and  Rauss,  1753  ;  Bager,  1758  ;  Voigt 
and  Kragi  1764;  Helmuth  and  Schmidt,  1769  ;  and  Kunze, 
1770,  In  company  with  Mr.  Brunnholtz  cam<-  also  Messrs. 
N.  Kurtz  and  •  Schaum,  who  were  ordained  in  1748  and 
were  among  the  most  faithful  and  usefnl  of  our  ministers; 
The  former  was  the  father  of  the  venerable  servant  of 
Christ,  whom  we  are  permitted  this  morning  to  welcome  in 
our  midst,  the  oldest  Lutheran  minister  in  the  United  States, 
bereft  of  late  of  the  partner  of  his  life,  himself  yet,  kindly 
spared  amongst  us  as  a  relic  of  a  former  generation.  The 
increase  of  ministers  was  slow.  When  the  first  Synod  was 
held,  in  1748,  there  were  only  eleven  regular  Lutheran 
ministers  in  the  United  States.1  Three  years  after  that 
time  the  number  of  congregations  was  rated  at  about  forty, 
and  the  Lutheran  population  in  America  at  sixty  thousand. 
The  greater  part  of  these  men  were  indefatigable  in  their 
labors.  Numerous  and  arduous  were  the  difficulties  in  their 
way.  The  population  was  unsettled,  ever  tending  farther 
into  the  interior;2  intemperance  had  already  made  sad  havoc 
in  the  land  ;3  the  semi-civilized  habits  so  natural  to  pioneers 
in  colonization,  the  various  frolics,  the  celebrations  in  honor 
of  Tammany,  the  Indian  chief,  &c,  which  were  then  ex- 
tensively observed,4  were  formidable  obstacles  to  religion. 
Inadequate  ministerial  support;  difficulty  of  traveling  from 
want  of  roads  in  many  directions  ;  and  not  unfrequently  the 
tomahawk  and  scalping  knife  of  the  Indian  impeded  their 
progress.  I  cannot  stop  to  tell  the  soul -stirring  story  of 
many  an  Indian  massacre.  A  single  instance,  from  the  pen 
of  father  Muhlenberg  himself,  may  teach  us  alike  to  ap- 
preciate the  security  of  our  worship  and  the  bitter  cost  at 
which  our  fathers  provided  it ;  may  teach  us  that  we  are 
reaping  the  fruits  of  their  sweat  and  blood.  The  case  was 
that  of  a  man  whose  two  grown  daughters  had  attended  a 
course  of  instruction  by  Mr.  Muhlenberg,  and  been  solemnly 
admitted  by  confirmation  to  the  communion  of  the  church. 
This  man  afterwards  went  with  his  family  some  distance 
into  the  interior  to  a  tract  of  land  which  he  purchased. 

(1)  In  1743,  Naesseman,  the  Swedish  minister,  reported  to  Sweden,  that 
there  were  at  that  time  twenty  German  Lutheran  congregations  in  Amer- 
ica.    Ileinsius.  iii,  p.  G67. 

(2)  Muhlenbnra;  states  that  in  five  vears  half  Ins  congregation  had 
changed.     (3)  Hal.  Nach.  p.  474.     (4)  fiall.  Nach,  p.  4441.  " 


22  RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHER AN  ISM. 

When  the  war  with  the  Indians  broke  out,  he  removed  his 
family  to  their  former  residence,  and  occasionally  returned 
to  his  farm  to  attend  to  his  grain  and  cattle.  On  one  occa- 
sion he  went  accompanied  by  his  two  daughters  to  spend  a 
few  days  there,  and  bring  away  some  wheat.  On  Friday 
evening  after  the  wagon  had  been  loaded,  and  everything 
was  ready  for  their  return  on  the  morrow,  his  daughters 
complained  that  they  felt  anxious  and  dejected,  and  were 
impressed  with  the  idea  that  they  were  soon  to  die.  They 
requested  their  father  to  unite  with  them  in  singing  the  fa- 
miliar German  funeral  hymn:  "Who  knows  how  near  my 
end  may  be,"1  after  which  they  commended  themselves  to 
God  in  prayer  and  retired  to  rest.  The  light  of  the  suc- 
ceeding morning  beamed  upon  them  and  all  was  yet  well. 
Whilst  the  daughters  were  attending  to  the  dairy,  cheered 
with  the  joyful  hope  of  soon  greeting  their  friends,  and  being 
out  of  danger,  the  father  went  to  the  field  for  the  horses, 
to  prepare  for  their  departure  home.  As  he  was  passing 
through  the  field,  suddenly  he  saw  two  Indians,  armed  with 
rifles,  tomahawks  and  scalping  knives,  rushing  towards  him 
at  full  speed.  The  sight  so  terrified  him,  that  he  lost  all 
self-command  and  stood  motionless  and  silent.  When  they 
were  about  twenty  yards  from  him,  he  suddenly,  and  with 
all  his  strength,  exclaimed  :  "  Lord  Jesus,  living  and  dying 
I  am  thine."  Scarcely  had  the  Indians  heard  the  Words, 
"Lord  Jesus,"  (which  they  probably  knew  as  the  white 
man's  name  of  the  "Great  Spirit,")  when  they  stopped 
short,  and  uttered  a  hideous  yell.  The  man  ran  with  al- 
most supernatural  strength  into  the  dense  forest,  and  by 
taking  a  serpentine  course  the  Indians  lost  sight  of  him  and 
relinquished  the  pursuit.  He  hastened  to  an  adjoining 
farm,  where  two  German  families  resided,  for  assistance. 
But  on  approaching  near  it,  he  heard  the  dying  groans  of 
the  families,  who  were  falling  beneath  the  murderous  toma- 
hawk of  some  other  Indians.  Having  providentially  not 
been  observed  by  them,  he  hastened  back  to  learn  the  fate 
of  his  daughters.  But,  alas  !  on  -'coming  within  sight,  he 
found  his  house,  barn  and  stable,  enveloped  in  flames ! 
Finding  that  the  Indians  had  possession  here,  too,  he  has- 
tened to   an   adjoining  farm   for  help.     Returning  armed, 

(1)  The  well  known  German  hymn,  "Wer  weisz  wie  nalie  mil*  mcin  Ernie. " 


RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHER A NISM.  23 

with  several  men,  they  found  the  house  reduced  to  ashes, 
and  the  Indians  gone  !  His  eldest  daughter  had  been  al- 
most entirely  burnt  up,  a  few  remains  only  of  her  body 
beino;  found  !  And  awful  to  relate,  the  younger,  though  the 
scalp  had  been  cut  from  her  head,  and  her  body  was  hor- 
ribly mangled  from  head  to  foot  with  the  tomahawk,  was 
yet  living!  "The  poor  worm,"  says  Muhlenberg,  "was 
yet  able  to  state  all  the  circumstances  of  the  dreadful 
scene."  After  having  done  so,  she  requested  her  father  to 
stoop  down  to  her  that  she  might  give  him  a  parting  kiss 
and  then  go  to  her  dear  Savior,  and  after  she  had  im- 
pressed her  dying  lips  upon  his  cheek,  she  yielded  her 
spirit  into  the  hands  of  that  Redeemer,1  who,  though  his 
judgments  are  often  unsearchable  and  his  ways  past  finding 
out,  has  nevertheless  said,  "lam  the  resurrection  and  the 
life,  if  any  man  believe  in  me,  though  he  die  yet  shall  he 
live." 

Such  were  the  difficulties  and  dangers  with  which  our 
fathers  had  to  contend,  in  planting  the  gospel  in  these 
western  wilds.  But  we  must  pass  on  to  glance  at  the 
second,  or 

MIDDLE  ERA  OF  OUR  CHURCH  tS  THIS  COUNTRY. 

The  event  selected  as  the  division  between  the  first  and 
second  periods  of  our  retrospect,  is  one  illustrious  in  the 
annals  of  the  world.  It  separates  between  the  reign  of 
different  political  theories,  the  divine  right  of  kings  to  gov- 
ern the  people,  and  the  people's  right  to  govern  themselves; 
between  the  principles  of  liberty  and  slavery;  between  the 
union  of  church  and  state,  which  had  prevailed  in  Europe 
since  its  establishment  by  Constantino  about  fourteen  hun- 
dred years  before,  and  absolute  liberty  of  conscience  un- 


(1)  Hallish.  Nacbr.  p.  1007,  8.  The  case  here  narrated  was  neither  ex- 
treme nor  rare.  The  elder  Mr.  Kurtz  on  the  2d  of  July..  1757,  states 
that  on  that  day,  the  lifeless  bodies  of  no  less  than  seven  members  of  his 
congregation  were  brought  to  the  church  for  burial,  they  having  been 
murdered  by  the  Indians  the  evening  before.  Being  anxious  to  improve 
this  solemn  scene  to  the  spiritual  welfare  of  his  hearers,  Mr.  Kurtz  deferred 
the  interment  until  the  succeeding  day;  and  suffered  the  mangled  bodies  to 
remain  in  the  church  until  the  congregation  convened ;  a  pleasing  evidence 
this,  of  his  solicitude  for  souls. 


2'4         RETROSPECT  OF  LUTHERANISM. 

controlled  by  civil  governments.  But  the  struggle  by  which 
this  glorious  declaration  of  Independence  was  sustained,  and 
in  which  our  forefathers  took  a  distinguished  part,  was  like 
every  other  war,  detrimental  to  the  religious  prosperity  of 
the  community.  Christianity  is  a  religion  of  peace,  and  the 
tempest  of  war  never  fails  to  blast  and  scatter  the  leaves 
which  are  for  the  healing  of  nations.  Hear  the  account  of 
one  of  those  venerable  men,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Helmuth,  just 
after  General  Gage  had  landed  at  Boston  with  9000  British 
troops,  dated  Feb.  25th,  1775.  "  Throughout  the  whole 
country  great  preparations  for  war  are  making,  and  almost 
every  person  is  under  arms.  The  ardor  is  indescribable 
which  is  manifested  in  these  melancholy  circumstances.  If 
a  hundred  men  are  required,  many  more  immediately  offer, 
and  are  dissatisfied  when  all  are  not  accepted.  I  know  of 
no  similar  case  in  history.  Neighborhoods  concerning  which 
it  would  have  been  expected,  that  years  would  be  requisite 
to  induce  them  volutarily  to  take  up  arms,  became' strongly 
inclined  for  war,  so  soon  as  the  battle  of  Lexington  was 
baown.  Quakers  and  Menonists  take  part  in  the  military 
exercises,  and  in  great  numbers  renounce  their  former  re- 
ligious principles.  The  hoarse  din  of  war  is  hourly  heard 
in  our  streets.  The  'present  disturbances  inflict  no  small  in- 
jury on  religion.  Every  body  is  constantly  on  the  alert, 
anxious,  like  the  ancient  Athenians,  to  hear  the  news,  and 
amid  the  mass  of  news  the  hearts  of  men  arc,  alas !  closed 
against  the  good  old  word  of  God.  The  Lord  is  chastising 
the  people,  but  they  do  not  feel  it.  Those  who  appear  to 
be  distant  from  danger  are  unconcerned  ;  and  those  whom 
calamity  has  overtaken  are  enraged  and  meditating  ven- 
geance. In  the  American  army  there  are  many  clergymen, 
who  serve  both  as  chaplains  and  as  officers.  I  myself  know 
two,  one  of  whom  is  a  Colonel  and  the  other  a  Captain. 
The  whole  country  is  in  a  perfect  enthusiasm  for  liberty. 
The  whole  population  from  New  England  to  Georgia  is  of 
one  mind,  and  determined  to  risk  life  and  all  things  in  de- 
fence of  liberty.  The  few  who  think  differently  are  not  per- 
mitted to  utter  their  sentiments.  In  Philadelphia  the  English 
and  German  students  are  formed  into  military  companies, 
wear  uniform,  and  are  exercised  like  regular  troops.  Would 
to  God  that  men  would  once  become  as  zealous  and  unan- 


RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHERAN  ISM.  25 

imous  in  asserting  their  spiritual  liberty,  as  they  are  in  vin- 
dicating their  political  freedom  ! ' 

This  melancholy  state  of  things  lasted  upwards  of  seven 
years.  Many  of  the  churches  were  destroyed  throughout 
the  land,  and  especially  in  New  England.  Zion's  church, 
the  largest  in  Philadelphia,  was  occupied  as  a  hospital2  by 
the  British  army  in  1778,  and  the  congregation  for  a  season 
wholly  expelled  ;  and  their  other  church,  St.  Michaels,  which 
had  been  built  1743,  the  year  after  Muhlenberg'^  arrival, 
was  used  by  the  enemy  as  a  garrison  church,  half  of  every 
Lord's  day,  the  congregation  having  the  use  of  it  in  the  af- 
ternoon. During  the  ravages  of  this  war,  no  regular  reports 
were  forwarded  to  Halle,  and  our  acquaintance  Avith  the  par- 
ticulars of  our  history  is  necessarily  circumscribed.  Many, 
however,  of  the  fathers  of  the  church  survived  the  revolu- 
tionary struggle,  and  remained  in  the  field  during  the  earlier 
part  of  this  period  ;  yet  one  by  one  they  dropped  off,  and 
were  received  to  their  eternal  rest.  From  the  (Kirchena- 
gende)  "Directory  for  Worship,"  published  in  1786,  three 
years  after  the  Independence  of  these  United  States  was 
acknowledged  by  Britain  and  the  wTar  closed,  we  learn,  that 
at  that  time  our  ministry  in  the  Middle  States  embraced  the 
following  twenty-four  persons :  Henry  Melchior  Muhlen- 
berg, D.  D.,  senior  of  the  ministerium,  Nicholas  Kurtz,  his 
younger  brother  William  Kurtz,  Lewis  Voigt,  John  Andrew 
Krug,  Christian  Imanuel  Schultze,  John  George  Eager,  Just 
Christian  Henry  Helmuth,  D.  D.,  John  Frederick  Schmidt, 
John  Christopher  Kunze,  D.  D.,  Gotthilf,  Henry  Ernst 
Muhlenberg,  D.D.,  Conrad  Wildbahn,  Jacob B.  Buskirk,  John 
Friderici,  Christian  Streit,  John  George  Jung,  Conrad  Roel- 
ler,  Jacob  Georing,  Daniel  Schroeter,  Daniel  Lehman,  Henry 
Moeller,  Frederick  Ernst,  Frederick  Valentine  Melsheimer, 
and  Daniel  Kurtz,  D.  D. 

In  addition  to  these,  the  following  laborers  among  many 
others,  entered  the  field  during  the  second  period,  and  car- 
ried forward  the  work  of  the  Lord :  John  Frederick  Wein- 
land,  Frederick  David  Schaeifer,  D.  D.,  Win.  Carpenter, 
George  Lochman,  D.  D.,  John  George  Schmucker,  D.  D., 
Christian  Endress,  D.  D.,  Ernest  L.  Hazelius,  D.  D.,  Philip 

(1)  Hallische  NacJiriofeten,  p.  1367,  8. 

(2)  Hallische  Nachriclitcn  p.  1403. 

3 


26  RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHE  R  AN  IS  32. 

F.  Mayer,  D.  D.,  John  Bachman,  D.  D.,  John  Ruthrauff, 
George  Flohr,  Paul  Henkel,  John  Staunch,  F.  W.  Geissen- 
hainer,  D.  D.,  Augustus  Wackerhagen,  D.  D.,  G.  A.  Lint- 
ner,  D.  D.,  G.  B.  Miller,  D.  D.,  Jno.  Herbst,  John  Knosky, 
H.  Muhlenberg,  D.  D.,  David  F.  Schaeffer,  D.  D.,  John 
Kecht,  Jacob  Miller,  D.  D.,  Ulrich,  Baetis,  Ernst,  D.  D.,  J. 
Becker,  D.  D.,  F.  C.  Schaeffer,  D.  D.,  J.  P.  Shindel,  A. 
Reck,  B.  Kurtz,  D.  D. 

The  number  of  congregations  and  ministers  was  much 
increased  during  this  period ;  but  owing  to  the  want  of  a 
suitable  institution  for  their  education  and  to  other  causes, 
the  proportion  of  men  destitute  of  a  learned  education  was 
also  augmented.  Nor  can  it  be  denied,  that,  whether  it  is 
attributable  to  the  unhallowed  influence  of  the  war,  or  to 
this  and  other  causes  in  conjunction,  the  standard  of  piety  in 
the  churches  was  somewhat  on  the  decline,  especially  in  the 
latter  part  of  this  period.  As  the  same  remark  is  also  ap- 
plicable to  all  the  other  religious  denominations  of  our  land, 
the  war  of  the  Revolution  and  the  war  with  England  in  1812, 
were  most  probably  its  principal  reason  ;  for  a  general  effect 
requires  an  equally  general  cause.  With  this  cause  co-ope- 
rated another,  almost  as  influential,  the  general  and  unpre- 
cedented facilities  offered  by  our  young  and  nascent  country 
to  accumulate  deceitful  riches,  and  to  neglect  the  treasures 
in  heaven ;  and  also  the  less  pious  character  of  the  late  ac- 
cessions made  to  our  churches  by  emigration  from  Germany, 
then  devastated  and  demoralized  by  the  deadly  poison  of 
war. 

In  addition  to  their  pastoral  labors,  several  of  our  princi- 
pal men  occupied  important  posts  in  literary  institutions. 
Dr.  Kunze  was  professor  of  the  Greek,  Latin  and  German 
languages,  in  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  established  in 
1779;  in  1785  Dr.  Helmuth  was  appointed  to  the  same 
station ;  and  they  were  confessedly  as  learned  men  as  any 
connected  with  the  institution.  At  this  time  the  Academy 
which  had  previously  existed,  was  converted  into  a  prepar- 
atory school  to  prepare  German  youth  to  understand  the  in- 
structions of  the  University. 

In  1786,  the  Kirch  enagende  was  published,  which  con- 
tinued in  use  during  nearly  the  whole  of  this  period  until  in 
1818,  the  one  now  employed  in  our  German  churches,  was 
published. 


RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHER ANISM.  27 

Iii  1787,  the  Legislature  out  of  gratitude  for  the  revolu- 
tionary services  of  the  Germans,  and  respect  for  their  in- 
dustry and  excellence  as  citizens,  endowed  a  college  in  Lan- 
caster for  their  special  benefit,  to  be  forever  under  their 
control.  Of  this  institution  Dr.  Muhlenberg,  then  pastor  in 
Lancaster,  was  chosen  president.  And  in  1791,  the  same 
body  passed  an  act,  appropriating  5000  acres  of  land  to  the 
ilourishing  free  school  of  the  Lutheran  church  in  Philadel- 
phia, in  which  at  that  time  eighty  poor  children  were  receiv- 
ing Gratuitous  education. 

In  1796,  at  which  time  the  difficulties  resulting  from  the 
conflict  between  the  German  and  E  no-fish  languages,  that 
prolific  source  of  endless  evils  to  our  churches,  already  be- 
gan to  appear,  there  was  a  very  enlarged  and  enlightened 
plan  for  the  establishment  of  a  German  and  English  school 
with  five  teachers,  devised,  and  if  we  mistake  not,  put  into 
operation  ;  but  for  reasons  which  we  do  not  find  on  record, 
it  seems  soon  to  have  been  abandoned. 

Had  this  plan  been  persisted  in,  and  as  a  necessary  con- 
comitant, suitable  provision  been  made  to  have  the  doctrines 
of  the  gospel  preached  in  English  to  those  who  could  not 
understand  German,  the  Lutheran  church  might  at  this  day 
be  as  numerous  as  any  other  in  Philadelphia.  But  in  pursu- 
ance of  a  policy  which  we  cannot  but  regard  as  mistaken, 
every  effort  to  introduce  English  preaching  was,  until  about 
the  close  of  this  period,  met  with  determined  opposition. 
Much  may,  however,  be  said  on  both  sides  of  this  question. 
Emigration1  was  still  going  on  rapidly,  and  as  the  increas- 
ing numbers  of  German  congregations  gave  full  employment 
to  all  the  laborers  in  the  field,  and  filled  up  the  places  of 
those  who  left  the  church  ;  it  is  perhaps  less  matter  of  sur- 
prise than  regret,  that  the  fathers  of  that  era,  made  no  pro- 
vision for  the  portion  of  the  rising  generation  unacquainted 
with  the  German  language. 

At  the  request  of  the  Philadelphia  church  council,  their 

(1)  In  17S5,  a  German  Society  was  established  in  New  York,  of  which 
Dr.  Kunze  was  an  active  member,  and  in  which  Baron  Steuben,  celebrated 
in  our  revolutionary  struggle,  took  a  deep  interest,  the  object  of  which  was 
alike  to  encourage  emigration  from  Germany  and  to  protect  the  rights  of 
those  who  seek  a  home  amongst  us.  Similar  societies  had  previously  ex- 
isted in  Philadelphia  and  Baltimore.    Hall.  Isach.  p.  1508,  1518. 


23  RETROSPECT    OF    LTJTKER  AITISH. 

pastors,  1791,  addressed  a  pamphlet  to  the  Lutherans  of 
that  city,  on  the  signal  evidences  of  the  divine  goodness  and 
mercy  to  them,  calling  on  them,  to  acknowledge  and 
evince  their  gratitude  by  upholding  their  German  re- 
ligious institutions  and  language.  It  was  published  on  oc- 
casion  of  the  re-opening  of  St.  Michael's  church,  after  a 
thorough  repair  ;  and  amidst  much  most  excellent  religious 
instruction,  states  the  fact,  that  three  of  the  largest  churches 
in  the  city  would  not  contain  all  the  descendants  of  the  Ger- 
man fathers,  if  they  were  animated,  by  the  zeal  which  char- 
acterized their  ancestors  in  1742.  There  is  one  incident 
in  the  early  history  of  our  German  churches  in  Philadel- 
phia, affording  so  striking  an  evidence  of  the  proverbial  in- 
tegrity of  the  German  character,  that  it  deserves  to  be 
particularly  noted.  The  corporation  paid  a  large  debt  due 
by  the  church,  to  some  mechanics,  in  continental  money, 
when  that  money  Avas  at  par.  Soon  after,  however,  that 
currency  depreciated  to  almost  nothing,  and  of  course  the 
loss  both  in  law  and  equity  would  have  fallen  on  those  in 
whose  possession  the  notes  were  at  the  time  found.  But  our 
noble  hearted  German  fathers  could  not  bear  the  thought, 
that  any  one  should  lose  upon  money  received  from  them, 
and  though  they  were  not  under  the  least  obligation  to  do 
so,  they  actually  made  up  the  entire  deficiency  and  paid  the 
debt  a  second  time  in  gold  and  silver!  in  that  same 
church,  there  was  as  early  as  1004  a  flourishing  Sabbath 
school  of  two  hundred  scholars  and  forty  teachers,  a  con- 
clusive evidence  that  the  cause  of  God  was  prospering  at 
that  time. 

Although  the  influx  of  ministers  from  Germany  had  di- 
minished near  the  close  of  this  middle  era ;  the  bond  of 
Christian  sympathy  and  union  between  us  and  the  mother 
country,  was  by  no  means  either  severed  or  impaired.  Of 
this  a  pleasing  demonstration  was  afforded  in  1814.  When 
Halle,  the  mother  of  our  central  American  church,  the  alma 
mater  of  Muhlenberg,  of  Handschuh,  Heinzelman,  Schultz, 
of  Eager,  of  Voigt,  of  Krug,  of  Helmuth,  of  Schmidt  and 
others,  had  greatly  suffered  by  the  devastation  of  the  Buona- 
partean  wars,  collections  were  taken  here,  with  great  prompt- 
ness, and  forwarded  to  Halle,  amounting  to  two  thousand 
three  hundred    and  thirty-four  dollars,  and  ten  cents ;    a 


RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHERAN1SM,  29 

specimen  of  Christian  sympathy  this,  which  was  liberally 
repaid,  when  in  182G,  Dr.  Benjamin  Kurtz  visited  Germany 
in  behalf  of  the  Theological  Seminary  of  this  Synod. 

About  the  close  of  this  period  the  state  of  piety  in  the 
American  churches  generally  was  improving,  and  a  clearer 
day  began  to  dawn  also  on  our  Lutheran  Zion. 

III.  The  Third  Period  we  style  the  era  of  the  General 
Synod,  because  the  formation  of  this  noble  institution,  was  a 
starting  place  and  a  central  radiating  point  of  improvement 
in  the  church,  whose  influence  has  been  uninterrupted  and 
most  propitious ;  and  not  entirely  confined  to  the  Synods 
which  formally  acceded  to  the  union.  Prior  to  this  era  the 
church  had  gradually  become  divided  into  live  or  six  dif- 
ferent, distant,  and  unconnected  Synods.  Having  no  regular 
intercourse  with  each  other,  these  several  portions  became 
more  or  less  estranged  ;  and  lost  all  the  advantages  of  mutual 
consultation,  confidence  and  co-operation.  But  a  number 
of  the  most  enlightened  and  active  men  in  different  portions 
of  the  church  lamented  its  decline,  and  resolved  on  efforts 
for  its  improvement.  The  first  of  these  efforts,  and  that 
which  brought  in  its  train  many  others  of  blessed  in- 
fluence, was  the  establishment  of  the  General  S}~nod  in 
1820,  whose  stated  meeting  has  convened  us  on  this  occa- 
sion. 

The  particular  circumstances  attending  the  formation  and 
growth  of  this  blessed  institution  are  known  to  'you  all,  and 
our  time  will  not  allow  us-to  narrate  them.  ?Tor  will  deli- 
cacy permit  us  in  the  presence  of  some  of  them,  to  speak, 
as  they  deserve,  of  that  noble  band  of  brethren,  who  were 
foremost  to  repel  the  onset  and  the  outcry  against  this  Synod 
and  bear  it  onward  to  victory  and  triumph  :  nor  of  that  band 
of  younger  brethren,  who,  when  the  recession  of  the  mother 
Synod  of  Pennsylvania  threatened  certain  dissolution  to  this 
body,  stepped  forward  and  no"bly  sustained  it  against  fearful 
odds,  until  the  storm  was  overblown,  and  by  a  course  of 
well-doing  the  prejudices  of  some  and  apprehensions  of 
others  were  removed. 

Much  might  be  said  of  the  spirit  of  brotherly  love,  of 
union  and  of  piety  which  this  Synod  tended  to  diffuse  ;  and 
of  the  Theological  Seminary  established  by  this  body,  in 

3a 


30  RETROSPECT    OF    L  UTH  E  R  A  XI  SM. 

which  upwards  of  one  hundred1  laborers  have  been  trained 
for  the  vineyard  of  the  Lord. 

Powerful  and  extensive  has  been  the  influence  of  this 
body  in  introducing  scriptural  discipline  into  our  churches, 
and  promoting  correct  views  of  church  government* 

Most  salutary  has  doubtless  been  the  influence  of  that  selec- 
tion of  ardently  pious  and  evangelical  hymns  published  by  this 
Synod,  by  which  hundreds  of  thousands  of  souls  have  been 
aided  in  their  devotions  and  taught  to  sing  the  songs  of  Zion 
in  their  pilgrimage  toward  the  heavenly  Jerusalem. 

Much  might  be  said  of  the  honorable  manner  in  which 
the  greater  part  of  the  brethren  and  churches  in  East  Penn- 
sylvania, and  elsewhere,  whilst  yielding  to  the  prejudices 
of  the  weaker  members,  yet  continued  to  afford  their  sub- 
stantial and  increasing  aid  to  every  good  work  undertaken 
by  this  Synod,  so  that  much  of  the  credit  for  what  lias 
been  achieved,  is  justly  due  to  their  co-operation. 

In  other  Synods  not  connected  with  the  General  Synod, 
a  similar  spirit  of  improvement  characterizes  this  age. 
Upon  the  whole,  therefore,  the  Lutheran  portion  of  the  Re- 
deemer's kingdom  in  this  country  has,  during  the  third  pe- 
riod, been  making  rapid  strides  in  improvement.  This  era 
is  also  distinguished  by  the  establishment  of  the  theological 
seminaries  at  Hartwick,  which  is  the  oldest  of  all,  at  Lex- 
ington and  at  Columbus  ;  all  of  which  are  doing  an  im- 
portant work  for  the  church  and  age.  The  general  progress 
of  the  church  is  demonstrated  by  the  fact,  that  at  the  com- 
mencement of  this  era,  there  were  but  one  hundred  and 
forty  Lutheran  ministers*  in  the  United  States,  and  at  the 
present  day  we  number  four  hundred  and  six.2  With  this 
cursory  review  of  our  past  history,  we  hasten  in  the 

II.    PLACE,    TO    GLANCE    AT    SOME    SELECT   TOPICS    CONNECTED 
WITH  IT. 

Our  first  topic  for  observation  shall  be  the  character  of 
the  church  government  and  Discijoline  adopted  by  the  fathers 

(1)  Now,  (1851. )the  number  of  those  who  have  been  connected  with 
the  Seminary,  has  increased  to  259. 

*  Synod  of  Pennsylvania,  including  "Maryland  and  Virginia,  contained 
74  ministers;  Synod  of  Ohio,  23  ;  North  Carolina,  15  ;  South  Carolina,  10; 
and  New  York  10.  (2)  Now,  771. 


P.ETr.CSPECT  OF  LUTHERASISM.        31 

of  our  American  branch  of  the  church.  Though  coming 
from  a  country,  where  the  union  of  church  and  state,  as 
well  as  other  circumstances,  prevented  the  early  Reformers 
from  restoring  church  government  and  discipline  to  its  prim- 
iive  and  apostolic  form;  when  our  fathers  reached  this 
land  of  liberty  they  at  once  adopted  the  form  which  Luther 
and  Lutheran  divines  generally,  have  always  regarded  as 
the  primitive  one,  namely  parity  of  ministers,  the  co-ope- 
ration of  the  laity1  in  church  government,  and  the  free  volun- 
tary convention  of  Synods.  Six  years  after  the  arrival  of 
father  Muhlenberg,  the  first  Synod  was  held  in  Philadel- 
phia, August  1 4th,  1748.  Even  at  this  first  Synod,  lay  del- 
egates were  in  attendance,  and  regularly  participated  in  the 
transaction  of  business.2  The  character  of  this  and  the 
subsequent  Synods  and  conferences,  was  interesting  in  the 
extreme,  and  breathed  a  spirit  truly  apostolic.  The  time 
was  spent  in  administering  the  affairs  of  the  churches  and 
in  pastoral  consultation ;  and  such  was  the  zeal  and  interest  of 
the  brethren,  that  they  repeatedly  during  the  same  con- 
ference, continued  their  pastoral  consultations  till  three 
o'clock  in  the  morning,  communing  together  about  the 
things  pertaining  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  But  hear  Muh- 
lenberg himself.  Speaking  of  a  Synod  held  in  1760,  at 
New  Providence,  a  village,  then  the  place  of  his  residence, 
and  now  called  Trap,  after  Rev.  Gerock  had  preached  a 
German  sermon  in  the  forenoon,  and  the  excellent  Provost 
Wrangel  of  the  Swedish  church,  an  English  discourse  in 
the  afternoon,  he  says  :  "  After  the  close  of  public  worship 
all  the  ministers  convened  at  my  house,  and  held  a  biblical 
colloquy  (colloquium  biblicum)  on  the  essential  character- 
istics of  genuine  repentance,  faith,  and  godliness  ;  in  which 
they  endeavored  to  benefit  each  other  according  to  the 
grace  given  them,  by  communicating  the  results  of  their 
own  experience  and  self-examination,  so  that  it  was  a 
cheering  and  delightful  season.  The  residue  of  the  even- 
ing was  spent  in  singing  spiritual  hymns  and  psalms  and  in 
conversation  about  the  spiritual  condition  of  our  churches ; 
and  so  short  did  the  time  appear,  that  it  was  3  o'clock  in 
the  morning  before  we  retired  to  rest.  Oh,  (he  adds)  how 
delightful  it  is  when  ministers,  standing  aloof  from  all  po- 
ll) HallLsche  Nachrichten,  p.  963.  (2)  p.  284,  286. 


32       RETROSPECT  OF  LUTHERANISM. 

litical  and  party  contests,  seek  to  please  their  Loi  d  and 
Master  Jesus  Christ,  and  have  at  heart  the  welfare  of  their 
churches  and  the  souls  entrusted  to  their  care ;  and  are 
willing  rather  to  suffer  reproach  with  the  people  of  God, 
than  choose  the  treasures  of  Egypt."  1 

Of  their  practice  to  require  the  laity  to  unite  in  the  vo- 
cation of  ministers,  we  have  a  decided  instance  in  the  case 
of  that  distinguished  and  laborious  servant  of  God,  the 
Rev.  Nicholas  Kurtz.  After  his  examination  in  1748,  by 
Messrs.  Muhlenberg,  Brunnholtz,  Handschuh  and  Hart- 
wick,  we  are  told,  the  elders  and  deacons  of  the  church  in 
which  Ik}  had  labored  as  a  licentiate,  were  called  on  to  sign 
his  vocation.2 

In  matters  of  discipline  also,  the  church  took  part.  When 
members  had  been  guilty  of  any  grievous  and  public  of- 
fense, Muhlenberg  required  them  to  appear  publicly  in 
church  before  the  altar,  and  profess  their  penitence  ;  after 
which  he  called  on  the  members  to  decide  by  vote,  whether 
the  individual  should  be  restored  to  the  privileges  of  church- 
inembership,  and  especially  of  sacramental  communion.3 

As  to  the  character  of  their  discipline,  it  was  evidently 
scriptural  and  evangelical.  They  practiced  the  public  ex- 
communication of  immoral  members  from  the  church.  Dif- 
ferent instances  of  this  practice  are  detailed  in  the  journals 
of  Muhlenberg,4  of  Helmuth5  and  others.  In  1772  Hel- 
muth, in  order  more  effectually  to  prevent  the  approach  of 
unworthy  members,  introduced  the  practice  of  requiring  all 
who  desired  to  commune,  to  communicate  their  names  to 
him  before  hand.6  The  register  of  names  was  read  before 
the  congregation,  and  those  of  immoral  members  publicly 
erased.  Father  Muhlenberg  introduced  a  very  scriptural 
discipline  in  the  Lancaster  church,  of  which  his  successor, 
Dr.  Helmuth,  speaks  in  terms  of  high  commendation.  One 
of  the  same  character  was  introduced  in  the  Philadelphia 
church  in  1663,  which  gave  to  the  pastors  power  to  reject 
all  immoral  members  from  the  sacramental  table.7  And  in 
1784  at  the  Synod  held  at  Philadelphia,  the  resolution  of  a 
.previous  Synod  was  confirmed,  requiring  of  certain  trans- 
gressors  public  acknowledgment  before  the  congregation, 

(1)  Hall.  Nach.  p.  855.  (2)  p.  284.  (3)  p.  185. 

(4)  p.  S07.  (-5)  p.  1347.        <6)  p.  1346.  (7)  p.  962. 


RETROSPECT    OF    -LUTHER  AN  ISM.  33 

as  the  only  condition  of  restoration  to  the  privileges  of 
church  members.1  How  scriptural,  therefore,  was  the  gov- 
ernment, how  spiritual,  how  faithful  the  discipline  of  our 
fathers  !  Well  may  it  be  said,  that  those  amongst  us,  who 
are  most  zealous  and  active  in  winning  souls  to  Christ,  ap- 
proximate nearest  to  the  good  old  ways  and  example  of  our 
fathers. 

The  second  topic,  to  which  we  invite  your  attention,  is  the 
literary  character  and  labors  of  the  founders  of  our  church 
in  this  country.  Their  literary  character  was  indisputably 
of  the  first  order.  The  greater  part  of  them  received  a 
full  university  education  at  Halle.  Muhlenberg,  Hand- 
schuh,  Heinzelman,  Shultz,  Bager,  Yoigt,  Krug,  Helmuth, 
and  Schmidt  and  others  were  educated  in  different  institu- 
tions. So  fully  was  this  fact  felt  by  the  literati  of  that  day, 
that  the  honorary  degree  of  Doctor  of  Divinity,  a  degree 
then  very  rarely  conferred,  was  bestowed  on  a  goodly  num- 
ber of  them,  and  their  being  appointed  to  professorships  in 
different  institutions  and  elected  members  of  different  learned 
societies,  affords  evidence  of  the  same  truth. 

Several  of  them  preached  both  in  English  and  German, 
and  of  Muhlenberg  can  be  said  what  is  applicable  not  to 
one  in  a  hundred  of  the  ablest  and  best  ministers  and  mis- 
sionaries of  our  own  age,  that  he  statedly  preached  in  three 
different  languages  on  the  same  day,  English,  Holland  and 
German.  Overloaded  as  they  were  with  missionary  labor 
and  pastoral  care,  these  devoted  men  found  little  leisure  for 
any  other  literary  labor  than  was  necessary  for  the  worship 
and  government  of  their  churches.  The  Swedish  Lutheran 
minister,  provost  Wrangle,  in  1761,  published  an  English 
version  of  Luther's  catechism,  which  had  also,  as  early  as 
1642,  been  translated  into  the  language  of  the  neighboring 
Indians,  by  Campanius,  likewise  a  Swede.  Benjamin  Frank- 
lin had  an  edition  of  the  same  work  printed  in  German,  and 
also  issued  proposals  for  publishing  "Arndt's  True  Chris- 
tianity." In  the  year  1786  both  the  German  hymn  book 
and  the  "Kirchen  Agende,"  or  Directory  for  Worship,  were 
published.  Of  the  former,  the  editors  were  Drs.  Muhlen- 
berg, Senr.  Kunze,  Helmuth  and  Muhlenberg,  jr.,  of  Lan- 
caster.    The  historical  narrative  of  the  establishment  and 

(1)  Hall.  Nach.j).  1458. 
3 


34  RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHERANISM. 

progress  of  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  country,  constitu- 
ting a  quarto  volume  of  1518  pages,  was  contributed  chiefly 
by  Dr.  Muhlenberg,  sen.,  (whose  valuable  and  pious  contri- 
butions would  form  several  8vo  volumes,)  Brunnholtz, 
Handschuh,  Kunze  and  Helmuth.  Even  literary  labor  may 
be  expended  amiss,  when  performed  at  the  expense  of  more 
active  and  urgent  care  of  souls.  It  therefore  redounds  to 
the  credit  of  these  men,  that  although  so  well  qualified, 
they  devoted  comparatively  little  time  to  literary  perform- 
ances. Yet  did  some  of  them,  such  as  Dr.  Kunze,  Dr. 
Helmuth,  Dr.  Muhlenberg  of  Lancaster,  make  valuable  and 
learned  contributions  to  the  literature  and  science  of  our 
land;  and  Lutheran  divines  in  this  country  generally,  have 
by  no  means  been  deficient  in  the  labors  of  their  pen. 

But  why  did  they  fail  to  furnish  the  church  with  such  lit- 
erary and  theological  institutions,  as  had  always  been  the 
glory  of  the  Lutheran  church  in  Europe,  and  one  of  her 
most  successful  means  of  extension  ?  Not  because  they 
were  insensible  to  their  importance,  or  inattentive  to  their 
duty.  Even  in  the  earlier  years  of  his  ministry,  Muhlen- 
berg advocated  the  necessity  and  importance  of  establish- 
ing a  theological  and  literary  institution  to  supply  the  church 
with  well  qualified  laborers.  As  early  as  1765,  Dr.  Frey- 
linghausen  remarks :  "  Mr.  Muhlenberg  has  often  expressed 
his  earnest  desire,  that  the  vast  and  increasing  multitude  of 
German  Lutherans  in  North  America  might  be  better  pro- 
vided for  in  regard  to  religious  instruction.  He  is  con- 
vinced, that  the  present  arrangements  are  insufficient ;  and 
that  a  Seminary  ought  to  be  established  to  train  up  laborers 
to  publish  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel.  But,  he  adds, — 
and  this  teaches  us  the  principal  obstacle  which  baffled  their 
efforts — hitherto  the  erection  of  houses  of  worship  has 
caused  such  extensive  expenditures,  that  the  greater  part  of 
our  congregations  are  burdened  with  debt,  and  unable  to 
contribute  to  such  an  enterprise."1 

In  1 773  a  commencement  was  actually  made  to  establish 
such  an  institution,  chiefly  through  the  zeal  and  enterprize  of 
Dr.  Kunze,  confessedly  one  of  the  most  learned  and  enlight- 
ened divines  of  America,  and  an  ornament  to  our  church,  to 
whom  Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton,  pays  the  following  deserved 

(1)  Hall.  Nach.  p.  1253-4. 


RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHERA.NISM.  35 

tribute:  "The  various  acquirements  of  this  gentleman,  and 
particularly  his  oriental  learning,  have  long  rendered  him  an 
ornament  of  the  American  republic  of  letters.  He  has  prob- 
ably done  more  than  any  individual  now  living  to  promote 
a  taste  for  Hebrew  literature,  among  those  intended  for  the 
clerical  profession  in  the  United  States.  He  is  doubtless 
entitled  to  the  character  of  a  benefactor  of  the  American, 
churches."  1  That  the  efforts  of  such  a  man,  seconded  by 
the  co-operation  of  Father  Muhlenberg  and  others,  failed  of 
eventual  success,  would  seem  to  compel  us  to  the  conclusion, 
that  the  fault  lay  not  in  them,  but  in  the  peculiar  condition 
of  our  congregations  at  that  day.  Six  years  afterward,  in 
1779,  when  the  Academy  in  Philadelphia  was  erected  into 
a  University,  a  German  professor  of  Latin,  Greek  and  He- 
brew, was  appointed,  principally  through  the  influence  of 
Dr.  Kunzc,  who  was  one  of  the  Trustees.  Dr.  Kunze  him- 
self was  urged  to  accept  the  appointment,  and  in  connection 
with  Dr.  Helmuth,  labored  with  some  success  for  the  Ger- 
man portion  of  the  community,  but  eventually  this  plan  also 
was  abandoned.  In  1785  Messrs.  Helmuth  and  Schmidt, 
then  pastors  in  Philadelphia,  commenced  a  private  seminary, 
and  for  twenty  years  continued  so  far  as  their  numerous 
pastoral  duties  would  permit,  to  instruct  candidates  for  the 
Lutheran  ministry,  among  whom  were  many  of  the  best  pas- 
tors and  divines  of  the  middle  era  of  our  history ;  but  old 
age  and  eventually  death  also  terminated  these  efforts. 

But  in  the  providence  of  God  the  time  seems  to  have 
arrived,  when  our  churches  are  alike  able  and  willing  to  ac- 
complish that  which  our  fathers  longed  and  prayed  for,  and 
wished  to  see,  but  died  without  the  sight.  It  is  one  of  the 
glories  of  the  present  era  of  our  church,  that  she  has  been 
actively  employed  in  laying  the  foundations  and  beginning  to 
rear  the  walls  of  such  theological  and  literary  institutions 
as  the  Providence  of  God  so  signally  blessed,  in  founding 
and  extending  the  churches  of  the  Reformation  both  in  Eu- 
rope and  America.  We  say  beginning  to  rear  the  walls  ; 
because  though  we  have  nominally  four  theological  semi- 
naries in  this  country,  they  are  not  half  endowed.  jSone  of 
them  have  funds  enough  to  support  half  as  many  teachers 
as  are  necessary  to  give  adequate  instruction  in  the  whole 

(1)  Dr.  Miller  on  the  18th  century,  vol.  ii.  p.  56. 


36  RETROSPECT     OF    LUTHER A N ISM. 

theological  course.  The  entire  time  of  three  professors  at 
least  is  requisite  for  this  purpose ;  and  the  best  endowed  of 
our  seminaries  has  an  addition  to  its  buildings,  little  more 
than  a  support  for  one  professor.  Is  it  not  evident  then,  that 
we  owe  it  to  the  memory  of  our  enlightened  and  zealous 
fathers,  who  laid  the  foundation  of  our  church,  that  we 
should  rear  the  superstructure  ?  When  they  of  their  poverty 
erected  altars  and  temples  to  our  God  in  this  howling  wilder- 
ness, ought  not  we  of  our  abundance  to  linish  the  work  they 
so  nobly  began,  and  make  adequate  provision  for  laborers 
to  cultivate  our  vineyard,  and  to  send  forth  others  into  the 
field  of  the  world?  Will  not  that  righteous  Judge,  who  re- 
quires much  from  those  to  whom  much  is  given,  demand  it 
at  our  hands  ?  But  we  cannot  doubt  from  what  we  have 
seen  and  heard  on  the  subject  of  our  contemplated  centen- 
ary, that  your  hearts  will  devise  liberal  things,  and  that 
your  hands  and  those  of  our  brethren  throughout  the  length 
and  breadth  of  our  church  will,  by  the  blessing  of  heaven, 
nobly  execute  them. 

The  third  and  last  topic  to  which  we  invite  your  attention, 
is  the  practical  piety  of  our  fathers,  and  their  views  of  con- 
version and  prayer  meetings  and  revivals  of  religion.  Muh- 
lenberg and  his  early  fellow  laborers  had  been  trained  by 
the  spirit  of  God  as  worthy  disciples  of  the  Frankean 
school.  The  period  of  their  education  was  the  age  of  re- 
vivals in  Germany,  and  succeeded  the  era  of  the  pietistic 
controversies,  which  grew  out  of  them,  and  enlisted  on  one 
side  or  other,  the  entire  theological  intellect  of  that  country. 
These  laborers  were  selected  by  Franke  the  younger,  and 
Freyhngbausen,  and  were  therefore  men  after  their  oavii 
heart,  were  chosen  spirits  of  Germany.  They  were  men 
not  unworthy  of  the  age  in  which  their  lot  was  cast,  the  age 
of  EdAvards,  of  Whitefield,  of  Wesley.  Their  own  views 
were  decidedly  orthodox  and  evangelical,  and  they  were 
careful  to  require  evidences  of  genuine  piety  from  applicants 
for  the  ministerial  office.  When  the  venerable  father  who 
is  yet  in  our  midst  was  licensed  in  1784,  among  the  prin- 
cipal questions  which  he  was  required  to  answer,  were  the 
following  :  How  do  you  prove  that  Christ  was  not  only  a 
teacher,  but  also  that  he  had  made  an  atonement  for  the  sins 
of  men?  What  is  meant  by  the  influences  and  blessings  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  ?     What  are  the  evidences  of  conversion  ? 


RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHER AN  ISM.  37 

How  do  you  prove  the  propriety  of  pedobaptism  ?  How  do 
you  prove  the  eternity  of  future  punishment?  Were  the 
apostles  infallible  in  their  instructions  ?  Questions  having  a 
manifest  bearing  on  the  errors  prevailing,  or  beginning  to 
prevail  in  that  age.  Their  preaching  was  most  evangelical 
and  edifying,  and  their  journals  show,  that  they  earnestly 
prayed  and  looked  for  the  divine  blessing.  Muhlenberg 
states,  that  he  sometimes,  after  sermon,  added  a  brief  para- 
phrase or  exhortation  on  the  closing  hymn,  and  described 
the  case  of  a  young  man  who  attributed  his  conversion  to 
this  practice.  Those  devoted  men  were  not  desirous  of 
merely  pleasing  their  hearers.     They  were  none  of 

Those  "  gentle  theologues  of  calmer  kind, 
Whose  constitution  dictates  to  their  pens. 
Who  cold  themselves,  think  ardor  comes  from  hell,' 

On  the  contrary,  all  that  they  have  written,  and  all  that  is 
on  record  of  their  sermons,  proves,  that  they  were  anxious 
mainly  for  the  glory  of  their  Saviour  and  the  salvation  of 
the  souls  committed  to  their  care.  It  was  in  this  spirit  that 
they  plainly  assailed  the  prevailing  vices  of  the  land,  and 
often  incurred  the  displeasure  of  the  vicious.  Thus,  for  his 
faithfulness  towards  Sabbath  breakers,  in  Philadelphia,  Dr. 
Kunze,  in  1784,  was  attacked  in  the  newspapers  of  the  day. 
Soon  after  his  settlement  in  New  York,  Dr.  Kunze  remarks : 
The  souls  that  have  been  gained  by  the  truth,  are  as  yet  few 
in  number.  Several  individuals  have  come  to  me,  and  with 
tears  besought  me  to  teach  them,  what  they  must  do  to  be 
saved."  The  reports  which  they  statedly  sent  to  Halle, 
abounded  in  individual  narratives  of  conversions,  and  de- 
monstrate that  they  watched  for  souls  as  those  that  must 
give  an  account. 

They  encouraged  prayer-meetings  among  their  church- 
members,  and  often  conducted  them  themselves.  Nor  did 
they  deem  it  necessary  to  forbid  these  meetings,  although 
formalists  within  the  church  opposed  them,  and  the  ungodly 
world  without  sometimes  disturbed  the  meetings,  as  -was 
done  at  Lancaster  in  1773,  in  the  pastoral  charge  of  Dr. 
Helmuth.  Speaking  of  a  revival  of  religion,  then  in  pro- 
gress, he  says  :  "  Twice  or  thrice  a  week,  meetings  were  held 
m  the  evening,  at  different  places   by  the  subjects  of  this 


33  RETROSPECT    OF    LUTHERAKISM. 

"work  of  grace,  and  the  time  spent  in  singing,  in  praying, 
reading  a  chapter  of  the  word  of  God,  or  of  Arndt's  True 
Christianity,  and  if  no  prayer-meeting  was  held  on  Sabbath 
evening  in  the  church,  the  substance  of  the  sermon  was  dis- 
cussed. In  some  houses  the  number  was  rather  large,  there 
being  sometimes  as  many  as  forty  persons  assembled  at  one 
place.  The  children  of  this  world  several  times  attempted 
to  disturb  their  worship,  by  standing  at  the  windows  listen- 
ing, and  by  throwing  against  the  doors.  But  by  grace  they 
were  enabled  to  bear  it  without  any  resistance,  and  even 
when  on  their  way  home  they  were  assailed  on  the  streets 
with  various  nicknames,  and  stigmatized  as  hypocrites,  piet- 
ists, &c,  they  answered  not  a  word.  Some  of  their  perse- 
cutors also,  when  they  heard  these  men  sing  and  pray  with 
so  much  fervor  and  sincerity,  not  only  ceased  their  opposi- 
tion, but  induced  others  to  do  the  same."1  The  labors  of 
the  greater  part  of  these  men  were  extensively  blessed. 
Speaking  of  a  visit  he  paid  to  Tolpehocken,  father  Muhlen- 
berg says  he  found  many  souls  who  professed  the  Rev.  Mr. 
N.  Kurtz  as  their  spiritual  father ;  and  his  own  labors  were 
crowned  with  very  extensive  success.  In  1782  there  was 
also  a  season  of  revival,  of  special  interest  in  the  church  in 
Philadelphia.  "  Particularly  among  the  young  (says  Dr. 
Kunze)  there  has  been  a  fire  kindled  which  continued  to 
burn  to  our  great  joy  about  a  year."  And  numerous  other 
similar  scenes  might  be  detailed  if  our  time  admitted.  But 
we  must  close. 

Thus,  my  brethren,  we  have  taken  a  hasty  retrospect  of 
our  past  history  in  this  country,  from  the  time  when  our 
fathers  first  pitched  their  tents  in  the  howling  wilderness, 
surrounded  by  ravenous  wolves  and  panthers,  and  still  more 
ferocious  savages.  The  view  is  rich  in  lessons  of  various  in- 
struction ;  but  our  trespass  on  your  time  and  attention,  al- 
ready too  long  continued,  forbids  us  to  pursue  them.  What 
Christian,  in  reviewing  this  history,  does  not  feel,  that  the 
founders  of  our  American  church  were  men,  whose  char- 
acter and  works  deserve  to  live  in  the  hearts  of  posterity. 
Who  does  not  feel  that  instead  of  having  outstripped  their 
zeal  and  fidelity,  we  have  too  often  fallen  short  of  their 


(1)  Hall.  Xach,  p.  1351-2. 


RETROSPECT     OF    LUTHERAN ISM.  39 

bright  example  ?  Who  is  not  compelled  to  admit  that  their 
memory  has  been  too  little  cherished  among  us  ?  That  in 
the  language  of  our  text  we  have  too  seldom  "remembered 
the  days  of  old,  and  considered  the  years  of  many  genera- 
tions ?"  That  we  have  too  seldom  asked  our  fathers  to  tell 
us  the  story  of  God's  dealings  with  them  in  the  land  of  their 
pilgrimage  ?  Or  what  elder,  what  ruler,  or  pastor  of  the 
church  among  us,  must  not  admit  that  he  has  too  rarely 
from  the  sacred  desk  magnified  the  goodness  of  God  to  our 
fathers,  and  through  them  to  us. 

The  memory  of  the  pilgrim  fathers  is  cherished  by  our 
New  England  brethren,  with  an  interest  bordering  on  vener- 
ation.  And  yet  we  hesitate  not  to  affirm,  that  in  regard  to 
piety  and  zeal,  father  Muhlenberg,  and  Brunnholtz,  and 
Handschuh,  and  Bolzius,  were  by  no  means  inferior  to  Cot- 
ton, Hooker,  Davenport,  or  the  Mathers  ;  and  in  learning 
they  were  their  superiors.  Let  then  the  contemplated  cen- 
tenary be  improved  as  a  favored  season,  to  review  the  good- 
ness of  God  to  us  and  his  American  Zion  in  general.  Let 
us  bless  God,  not  that  we  are  better  than  our  fathers  ;  but 
that  they  were  so  good,  so  faithful,  so  rich  in  blessings, 
which  have  flowed  down  to  us.  Let  us  thank  God,  not  that 
we  are  better  than  other  portions  of  his  kingdom  in  our  land  ; 
but  that,  in  common  with  them,  we  have  fallen  heirs  to  so 
rich  a  legacy  of  civil  and  political,  and  above  all,  of  religi- 
ous liberty,  bought  by  the  joint  blood  of  our  fathers  and 
theirs,  bestowed  by  the  kind  Providence  of  their  God  and 
ours. 

Let  us  learn  from  the  review,  that  if  God  so  abundantly 
blessed  the  labors  of  our  fathers,  amid  such  mountains  of 
difficulty,  he  will  not  withhold  the  gracious  influences  of 
his  Spirit  from  us  ;  but  that  whenever  a  Paul  faithfully 
plants,  and  an  Apollos  attentively  waters,  God  will  never 
withhold  the  increase.  Let  us  therefore  humbly  and  im- 
partially contemplate  our  defects  as  watchmen  on  Zion's 
walls,  and  by  the  grace  of  God,  purpose  their  removal.  Let 
us  consider  attentively  the  various  defects  in  some  of  our 
churches,  the  low  state  of  piety,  the  laxity  of  discipline,  the 
worldliness  and  indifference  ;  and  let  us  humble  ourselves, 
and  pray  and  labor  for  the  coming  of  a  brighter  day.  Let  us 
take  to  heart  the  pecuniary  difficulties,  the  imperfect  means 
of  instruction  afforded  by  our  imperfectly  endowed  institu 


40         RETROSPECT  OF  LUTHERANISM. 

tions,  amid  which  our  ministers  must  struggle  into  the  min- 
istry ;  and  let  us  not  rest  until  by  the  blessing  of  God, 
those  difficulties  are  removed,  until  our  church  can  boast  of 
something  like  a  Halle  in  the  United  States,  until  we  can 
offer  to  our  students  advantages  equal  to  those  which  the 
founders  of  our  church  enjoyed  in  the  land  of  their  fathers. 
Then  will  our  church  increase  in  efficiency  and  piety ;  then 
will  she  be  enabled  to  exert  a  more  powerful  and  salutary 
influence  on  the  future  destinies  of  this  great  nation ;  then 
will  she  be  a  more  worthy  coadjutor  with  the  other  churches 
of  our  Lord,  in  spreading  the  triumphs  of  the  cross,  in  es- 
tablishing the  universal  reign  of  kin":  Emanuel,  in  ushering 
in  the  day  of  millenial  glory,  when  the  kingdoms  of  this 
world  shall  have  become  the  kingdoms  of  our  Lord  and  his 
Christ. 


II.    DISCOURSE. 


PORTRAITURE  OF  LUTHERANISM. 


And  after  these  things  I  saw  another  angel  come  down  from  heaven, 
having  great  power  ;  and  the  earth  was  lightened  with  his  glory.  And  he 
cried  mightly  with  a  strong  voice,  saying,  Babylon  the  great  is  fallen,  and 
is  become  the  habitation  of  devils,  (daimonon,  deities,  saints  and  idols,)  and 
the  hold  of  every  foul  spirit,  and  a  cage  of  every  unclean  and  hateful  bird. 
And  I  heard  another  voice  from  heaven,  saying,  Come  out  of  her,  my  peo- 
ple, that  ye  be  not  partakers  of  her  sins,  and  that  ye  receive  not  her 
plagues. — Rev.  xviii.  1-4. 

That  which  we  have  seen  and  heard  declare  we  unto  you.  that  ye  also 
may  have  fellowship  with  us ;  and  truly  our  fellowship  is  with  the  Father, 
and  with  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ. — 1  Jobn  i.  3. 

If  there  come  any  unto  you  and  bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive  him  not 
into  your  house,  neither  bid  him  God  speed. — 2  John  v.  10. 

The  visible  church  of  Christ  is  that  external  kingdom, 
which  the  Son  of  God  established  upon  earth.  It  embraces 
those  who  make  a  credible  profession  of  his  religion,  and  is 
designed  as  a  nursery  to  train  souls  for  that  kingdom  in 
heaven,  into  which  no  unholy  thing  can  enter.  Though  at 
present  unhappily  divided,  it  is  substantially  one  universal 
body.  To  embraces  not  the  members  of  any  one  denomina- 
tion alone,  but  all  of  every  land,  of  every  name,  and  of  every 
complexion,  who  love  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  The  mem- 
bers of  this  body  of  Christ  sustain  certain  mutual  relations 
of  fraternity ;  and  however  in  the  providence  of  God,  they 
have  been  permitted  to  adopt  some  diversities  of  external 
form,  and  to  entertain,  as  did  the  primitive  disciples  them- 
selves, some  minor  differences  of  opinion,  "they  are  bound 
4a 


42  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERANISM. 

to  exercise  holy  fellowship  and  communion,"  not  only  to- 
wards those  of  their  own  house  and  denomination,  but  "as 
God  offereth  opportunity,  unto  all  those  in  every  place,  who 
call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,"1  and  hold  the  car- 
dinal doctrines  of  our  common  Christianity.  At  the  same 
time,  if  any  come,  preaching  another  gospel ;  we  are  pro- 
hibited from  "receiving  them  into  our  house,  or  bidding 
them  God  speed."  Hence,  wherever  a  church  is  estab- 
lished in  a  place  where  her  doctrines  are  imperfectly  known, 
it  is  due  to  surrounding  Christians  whose  fellowship  is  in- 
vited, and  to  whom  the  hand  of  Christian  fraternity  is  ten- 
dered, that  such  exposition  be  made  of  her  views  and  pe- 
culiarities, as  will  enable  others  justly  to  appreciate  her 
claims  to  recognition  and  regard. 

In  this  flourishing  city  a  large  proportion  of  the  inhabit- 
ants have,  -from  the  beginning,  either  immediately  or  by  de- 
scent, belonged  to  the  great  German  family,  and  very  many 
of  them  to  its  Lutheran  branch.  The  larger  part  of  these 
having  by  the  current  of  business,  of  social  relations  and 
political  institutions,  been  led  into  greater  familiarity  with 
the  adopted  language  of  our  land,  have,  in  the  last  thirty 
years  united  with  the  several  English  churches ;  in  which, 
we  trust,  they  are  doing  and  receiving  good.  Others,  if 
we  are  rightly  informed,  who  preferred  to  worship  in  the 
German  language,  erected  a  church  about  the  year  1 800,  in 
union  with  our  German  Reformed  brethren,  and  made  it  a 
united  German  church  for  both  denominations,  which  is 
still  nourishing  at  this  time.  Within  the  last  few  years,  two 
other  churches,  entirely  Lutheran,  have  been  built  by  the 
labors  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Heyer,  the  zealous  missionary  ef 
our  domestic  missionary  society,  in  conjunction  with  a  little 
band  of  enterprising  Lutheran  laymen,  one  located  in  the 
city  proper,  and  the  other  in  Alleghanytown.  To-day  we 
are  assembled  within  the  sacred  walls  of  a  third,  an  En- 
glish Lutheran  church,  erected  by  a  portion  of  the  same 
enterprising  and  zealous  band,  in  conjunction  with  their  be- 
loved pastor,  the  Rev.  Mr.  McCron.  There  having  hereto 
fore  been  no  edifice  in  this  city,  devoted  to  the  worship  oi 
God  by  Lutherans  in  the  English  language,  the  English 

(1)  Westminster  Confession,  Art.  xxvi.  2.    See  also  Augsburg  Confession, 
Art.  vii.  viii. 


PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHER  AN  ISM.  43 

community  has  remained  comparatively  unacquainted  with 
the  precise  doctrines  and  forms  of  worship  of  this  eldest 
member  of  the  Protestant  family,  of  that  church  which, 
Under  God,  was  the  first  to  obey  the  voice  from  heaven, 
and  ''come  out  from  the  Romish  Babylon,"  and  which,  by 
the  Divine  blessing,  has  been  extended  over  a  wider  field 
and  larger  population  than  any  other  in  the  entire  Protest- 
ant world.  In  our  own  commonwealth,  also,  this  church  is 
decidedly  the  largest,  though  not  in  ministers,  yet  in  the 
number  of  her  churches  and  members.1  Under  these  cir- 
cumstances it  is  deemed  alike  appropriate  to  the  occasion 
and  respectful  to  this  promiscuous  assembly,  to  step  aside 
from  the  ordinary  topics  of  pulpit  discussion,  and  spend  the 
hour  in  attempting  to  present 

A  PORTRAITURE  OF  THE  LUTHERAN  CHURCH. 

We  invite  your  attention 

I.  To  HER  ORIGIN. 

II.  Her  primitive  features, 

III.  Her  extension.     And, 

IV.  Her  progressive  development  or  improvement., 

The  Lutheran  church  is  indebted  for  her  name,  as  is  the 
Protestant  ministry  for  the  name  preacher,2  to  the  derision 
of  the  Catholics.  The  distinguished  papal  theologian,  Dr. 
Eckius,3  the  opponent  of  Luther  and  Carlstadt,  in  the  cele- 

(1)  The  number  of  Lutheran  churches  in  Pennsylvania  is  323  ;  the  num- 
ber of  communicants  reported,  36  516:  the  number  of  ministers.  111.  of 
whom  64  belong  to  the  synod  of  East  Pennsylvania,  40  the  synod  of  West 
Pennsylvania,  and  7  bordering  on  the  state  of  Ohio,  are  connected  with  the 
synod  of  that  State. 

(2)  As  preaching  had  been  almost  entirely  neglected  by  the  Romish 
priesthood.,  and  their  worship  had  degenerated  into  little  else  than  a  mere 
routine  of  ceremonies,  the  fact  that  Lutheran  ministers  made  the  preaching 
of  God*s  word  a  prominent  part  of  their  public  services,  naturally  arrested 
attention,  and  the  Romanists  stigmatized  them  as  mere  proclaimers,  c;  prrcdi- 
cantes  'J  or  " prediger"  (Dutch  preeken,  French  prccher,  English  <;  preach,'') 
"■preachefi"  a  term  of  far  less  dignity  and  significance  in  their  eyes  than 
that  of  priest. 

(3)  Dr.  Vater,  in  his  Continuation  of  Heuke's  Church  History,  vol.  ix. 
p.  205.  attributes  part  of  the  credit  of  this  name  to  Pope  Adrian,  as  also  to 
the  anti-Melanchttionians. 


44  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERA^ISM. 

brated  disputation  at  Leipsic,  in  the  year  1519,  wishing  to 
show  his  contempt  for  Luther  and  his  cause,  and  not  dream- 
ing whereunto  this  matter  of  the  reformation  would  grow, 
first  stigmatized1  the  friends  of  the  reformer  as  Lutherans, 
with  the  same  feelings  with  which  we  speak  of  the  Owen- 
ites  and  Fanny  Wright  men  of  our  day.  The  term  being 
regarded  as  a  happy  conceit,  was  soon  spread  among  the 
enemies  of  the  cause ;  and  its  friends,  though  opposed  to 
it  in  principle,  responded  to  the  name,  because  they  were 
not  ashamed  of  their  leader.  But  the  name  officially  adopted 
by  the  Lutheran  reformers  was  that  of  the  Evangelical  church, 
that  is,  the  gospel  church,  in  antithesis  to  the  legal  ritual  of  the 
Old  Testament,  the  very  name  recently  adopted  by  the 
united  Lutheran  and  Reformed  church  in  Prussia.  Luther 
himself,  like  the  great  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  protested 
most  decidedly  against  the  use  of  his  name  as  the  Shib- 
bolet  of  a  sect,  and  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  his  advice  was 
disregarded. 

The  Lutheran  church  in  this  country  has,  in  common  with 
that  of  our  German  Reformed  brethren,  also  been  distinct- 
ively termed  the  German  church.  This  designation  must 
not  be  understood  as  implying  the  limitation  of  the  worship 
of  either  of  these  churches  to  the  German  language.  It  is 
known  to  the  intelligent  hearer,  that  in  different  countries, 
the  services  of  the  Lutheran  church  are  conducted  in  the 
Swedish,  the  Norwegian,  the  Danish,  the  Icelandic,  the 
Russian  and  the  French,  as  well  as  in  the  English  and  Ger- 
man languages.  Yet  it  is  true,  that  as  Germany  was  the 
cradle  of  the  reformation,  she  was  also  the  primitive  seat  of 
that  church,  which  grew  out  of  the  reformation  in  the  land 
of  Luther.  Germany  is  still  the  most  extensive  scat  of 
Lutheranism,  as  she  also  is  the  land  of  our  fathers.  No 
other  foreign  country  is  therefore  fraught  with  such  inter- 


(1)  "K'oeeher's  Yertheidigung,  &c,  p.  66,  68.  Thus  George,  the  Mar- 
grave of  Brandenburg,  when  reproached  for  being  a  Lutheran,  indignantly 
and  nobly  replied  :  "  I  was  not  baptized  in  the  name  of  Luther,  he  is  not 
my  God  and  Savior,  I  do  not  believe  in  him,  and  am  not  saved  by  him ; 
and  therefore,  in  this  sense  I  am  no  Lutheran.  But  if  I  be  asked,  whether 
with  my  heart  and  lips  I  profess  the  doctrines  which  God  restored  to  light 
through  the  instrumentality  of  his  blessed  servant,  Dr.  Luther,  I  neither 
hesitate  nor  am  ashamed  to  call  myself  a  Lutheran .  In  this  sense  I  am, 
and  as  long  as  I  live,  will  remain  a  Lutheran." 


PORTRAITURE     OF    LTJTilE  R  AN  I  S  M.  45 

esting  and  hallowed  associates  to  the  great  mass  of  Amer- 
ican Lutherans  as  Germany,  the  mother  of  the  reformation, 
the  cradle  of  Lutheranism,  the  land  where  our  fathers  pro* 
claimed  the  gospel  of  salvation,  where  Spener  sowed  the 
seed  of  truth,  where  Arndt  preached  and  wrote  and  lived 
his  "True  Christianity,"  where  Franke  wrought  his  works 
of  love,  and  where  believing  Luther  poured  his  prayer  of 
faith  into  the  lap  of  God !  But  it  is  not  only  to  Lutheran 
minds  that  Germany  is  encircled  with  interesting  associa- 
tions. Although  the  populace  are  too  little  acquainted  with 
the  fact,  yet  what  intelligent  scholar  does  not  know  that  the 
Germans  constitute  one  of  the  most  distinguished  branches 
of  the  human  family,  and  that  at  different" periods  through- 
out the  two  thousand  years  of  their  national  history, 
they  have  excelled  in  all  that  is  truly  noble  and  praise- 
worthy in  heathen  virtue,  or  interesting  in  the  fruits  of 
an  enlightened  and  active  Christian  piety  ?  Germany  was 
originally  inhabited  by  a  heroic  and  martial  people,  whose 
origin  is  enveloped  in  some  obscurity.  Their  language  and 
religion  point  us  to  Asia.  They  certainly  proceeded  from 
the  north  of  the  Euxine  sea,  and  known  as  Scythians,  Teu- 
tones,  Franks,  &c,  overspread  all  Western  Europe.  The 
English  are  both  as  to  language  and  population,  in  part  de- 
scended from  two  of  these  German  tribes,  the  Anglos  and  the 
Saxons,  who  at  an  early  day  conquered  Britain,  and  formed 
the  Anglo-Saxon  race,  whose  lineage  is  often  boasted  of  by 
a  portion  of  our  citizens.  When  first  visited  by  the  Ro- 
mans about  the  time  of  our  Saviour,  the  Germans  had  al- 
ready for  ages  inhabited  the  country,  and  had  lost  all  traces 
of  their  earliest  history.  Divided  into  many  independent 
tribes,  and  often  engaged  in  intestine  wars,  each  tribe  ac- 
knowledged no  laws  but  those  enacted  by  the  majority  at  a 
general  council.  Far  removed  from  the  refinement  and  lite- 
rary character  of  the  Romans,  they  were  alike  free  from  their 
licentiousness  and  effeminacy.  Hospitality  and  conjugal 
fidelity  were  prominent  characteristics  of  the  Germans  ;  and 
a  promise  given  to  friend  or  foe,  they  held  inviolable,  even  at 
the  risk  of  life.  They  cherished  a  firm  belief  of  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul,  and  of  future  retributions.  They  were  in- 
deed polytheists,  but  their  religion  was  of  the  sublimer  cast. 
They  neither  bowed  down  to  idols,  nor  worshipped  in  tem- 
ples made  with  hands,  but  offered  their  devotions  in  open 


4'6  PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHERAN  ISM. 

groves,  under  the  broad  canopy  of  heaven;  for,  says  the 
Roman  historian,  they  regarded  their  gods  as  too  sacred 
"and  great  to  be  confined  in  temples,  or  represented  by 
idols  of  wood  or  stone.1 

Of  the  different  tribes  of  this  numerous  family  which 
overspread  all  western  Europe,  those  only  retain  the  name 
of  Germans,  in  modern  history,  who  reside  in  the  territory 
denominated  Germany.-  Their  martial  spirit  rendered  diffi- 
cult the  introduction  of  Christianity  among  them,  which  was 
however  effected  at  least  in  name  successively  among  the 
different  tribes,  from  the  third  to  the  eighth  century.  The 
forgiving  spirit  of  the  gospel  gained  a  tardy  victory  over 
their  warlike  minds ;  as  was  strikingly  illustrated  in  the  in- 
stance of  Clovis,2  king  of  the  Franks,  a  tribe  that  settled  in 
Gaul.  On  one  occasion,  whilst  Remigius  was  preaching  to 
them  and  depicting  in  glowing  colors  the  sufferings  of  the 
Saviour  when  suspended  on  the  cross,  the  king,  no  longer 
able  to  restrain  his  spirit,  cried  out  in  the  midst  of  the  con- 
gregation :  "Ah,  if  I  had  been  there  with  my  Franks,  the 
Jews  should  not  have  crucified  the  Lord  !"  Unhappily  the 
Christianity  first  introduced  among  them  was  strongly  tinc- 
tured with  the  corruptions  of  Rome,  and  in  the  progress  of 
ages,  the  Germans  participated  extensively  in  the  increasing 
superstitions  and  degeneracy  which  reigned  at  the  fountain 
head.  But  in  the  providence  of  God  it  was  reserved  for 
this  heroic  and  undaunted  people,  to  take  the  lead  in  break- 
ing the  bonds  by  which  Europe  had  for  ages  been  held  in 
subjection.  "  Whilst,"  says  the  distinguished  Lutheran  his- 
torian, Dr.  Mosheim,  "  the  Roman  pontiff  slumbered  in  se- 
curity at  the  head  of  the  church,  and  saw  nothing  through- 
out the  vast  extent  of  his  dominion  but  tranquility  and 
submission,  and  while  the  worthy  and  pious  professors  of 
genuine  Christianity  almost  despaired  of  seeing  that  reforma- 
tion on  which  their  ardent  desires  and  expectations  were 
bent;  an  obscure  and  inconsiderable  person  arose,  on  a 
sudden,  in  the  year  1517,  and  laid  the  foundation  of  this 
long-expected  change,  by  opposing  with  undaunted  resolu- 
tion his  single  force  to  the  torrent  of  Papal  ambition  and  des- 
potism.   This  remarkable  man  was  Martin  Luther,  of  Eisle- 

(1)  See  Schroeck's  Allgemeine,  Weltgeschiclite.  vol.  iii,  p.  68. 

(2)  Clovis  belonged  to  the  German,  Salian  tribe.     Henke,  vol.  i,  p.  387. 


PORTRAITURE     OF     LUTHERAKISM.  47 

ben,  in  Saxony,1  an  Augustinian  monk,  and  professor  of  the- 
ology in  the  university  which  had  been  erected  at  Wittenberg 
a  few  years  before."  It  was  this  interesting  people,  after  they 
had  thrown  off  the  yoke  of  Rome,  and  through  the  instru- 
mentality of  their  countryman,  Luther,  and  others,  received 
the  pure  and  unadulterated  word  of  God,  that  constituted 
themselves  a  reformed,  an  evangelical  church.,  which  has 
been  denominated  Lutheran.  And  it  is  from  this  interest- 
ing nation  and  this  church,  that  the  German  portion  of 
the  Lutherans  in  this  country  are  descended. 

The  incidents  of  this  interesting  revolution,  which  affected 
both  church  and  state  throughout  Europe,  we  cannot  stop 
even  to  glance  at.  It  was  a  revolution  not  merely  of  out- 
ward forms,  but  of  the  elementary  principles,  which  had  for 
ages  been  the  basis  of  all  institutions,  both  civil  and  eccle- 
siastical.  Suffice  it  to  say,  that  by  his  ninety-five  theses, 
by  his  various  disputations,  by  his  noble  translation  of  the 
bible  into  German,  (a  work  to  which  even  Schiller,  confes- 
sedly one  of  the  greatest  master?  of  the  German  language, 
has  professed  himself  much  indebted,)  by  his  laborious 
preaching  and  teaching,  and  by  his  very  numerous  publica- 
tions, which  Seckendorf  enumerates  at  several  hundreds  ; 
Luther  and  his  Spartan  band  of  co-workers,  Melancthon, 
Zwingle,  Calvin,  and  others,  accomplished  the  greatest  and 
most  salutary  revolution  which  Europe  has  witnessed  since 
the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era ;  a  revolution,  also, 
to  which,  in  the  providence  of  God,  these  United  States 
may  clearly  trace  their  liberties. 

Without  originally  designing  a  separation  from  Rome,  the 
increasing  light  which  burst  in  upon  his  mind,  as  well  as  the 
inflexible  opposition  of  the  Papal  court  to  all  reform,  taught 
him  the  necessity  of  entire  separation  from  that  degenerate 
hierarchy  which  had  corrupted  the  waters  of  life,  and  re- 
fused to  have  them  purified  by  the  salt  of  the  gospel. 

The  question  here  arises,  was  the  Romish  establishment 
still  a  Christian  church,  or  was  she  antichrist  ?  And  was 
the  ordination  valid  which  Luther  obtained  in  her  ?  Though 
lamentably  corrupt,  we  must  still  regard  her  as  at  that 
time  a  part  of  the  true  church  of  Christ,  because  some  of 
the  grossest  corruptions  which  prevailed    in  a  part  of  the 

(1)  Moslicim,  vol.  iv,  p.  ^5. 


48  PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHERANISM. 

Romish  church  were  not  general,  and  having  not  yet 
been  received  into  the  official  standards  of  papacy,  could 
not  be  charged  on  her  as  a  whole,  and  did  not  form  a  nec- 
essary part  of  her  system.  Such  corruptions  are  the  denial 
of  the  cup  to  the  laity,  canonization  of  the  vulgate  version 
of  the  scriptures,  the  elevation  of  tradition  to  an  equality 
with  the  word  of  God,  &c.  But  when  the  Council  of  Trent, 
about  twelve  years  after  the  publication  of  the  Augsburg- 
Confession,  (1542,)  enacted  these  abuses  into  integral  and 
essential  parts  of  Romish  faith,  and  required  them  of  all 
who  desired  to  be  members  of  the  Romish  church,  the  marks 
of  antichrist  were  indelibly  impressed  upon  her,  and  she 
lost  her  claim  as  a  church  to  Christian  recognition.  Her 
ordination  of  Luther,  therefore,  in  1507,1  was  valid,  and  as 
he  renounced  her  jurisdiction  on  Dec.  10,  1520,  by  commit- 
ting the  papal  bull  of  citation  to  the  flames,  her  subsequent 
excommunication  did  not  reach  him,  and  he  stands  as  a  se- 
ceder  from  her  communion.2  Or,  if  we  date  the  origin  of  the 
Lutheran  church  from  1530,  and  suppose  Luther  to  have  re- 
mained under  Romish  jurisdiction  till  then,  when  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  was  published,  the  ordination  of  Luther 
and  his  associates  still  remains  untouched ;  for  the  papal 
bull  of  excomunication  in  1520,  being  wholly  unrighteous 
and  contrary  to  the  word  of  God,  could  no  more  deprive 
them  of  their  ministerial  character,  than  the  decision  of 
the  Jewish  Sanhedrim  against  the  apostles,  commanding 
them  to  speak  no  more  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus ;  or 
the  excommunication  of  the  orthodox  ministry  by  the  Arians, 
when  they  gained  a  temporary  ascendancy  in  the  fourth 
century,  could  divest  them  of  their  clerical  character.  The 
Lutheran  and  the  protestant  ministry  generally,  is  therefore 
as  valid  as  was  that  of  Rome  at  the  time  of  the  reformation, 
even  if  we  admitted  the  necessity  of  a  lineal,  personal  suc- 
cession from  the  apostles. 

As  to  the  doctrine  of  papal  apostolic  succession,  it  is  a 


(1)  Luther  was  ordained  on  the  fourth  Sunday  after  Easter,  called,  in  the 
old  calenders,  Sunday  Cantate. 

(2)  The  bull  of  citation  to  repentance  and  retraction  within  sixty  days,  was 
published  June  15,  1520;  and  the  final  bull  of  excommunication  January 
3rd,  1521,  twenty-five  days  after  he  publicly  renounced  JUomauism  by  burn- 
ing  the  former  bull. 


PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERAN ISM.  49 

mere  figment,  and  can.  never  be  proved  by  the  Papists 
themselves.  To  say  nothing  of  their  doctrine  of  intention,, 
which  cardinal  Bellarmine  himself  asserts,1  renders  doubt- 
ful the  validity  of  every  Romish  sacrament ;  where  was  their* 
papal  succession  when  Liberius,  the  occupant  of  the  holy 
see,  professed  Arianism,  A.  D.  357  ?  Where  was  it  in  the 
fourteenth,  century,  during  the  so-called  great  westenv 
schism,  from  A.  D.  1378  to  1414,  when  two  different  lines. 
of  contending  pontiffs  reigned  simultaneously,  each  having 
a  portion  of  the  church  adhering  to  him,  each  excommuni- 
cating the  other,  and  finally  both  deposed  as  heretical  and. 
perjured  by  the  Council  of  Pisa  in  1409  V 

We  admit,  indeed,  that  the  existing  ministry  of  the 
church  are  ordinarily  the  proper  agents  to  induct  others  in-, 
to  the  sacred  office,  and  thus  the  propriety  of  regular  min-. 
isterial  succession  arises.  But  it  is  conceded  by  all,  that 
such  succession  is  found  in  all  the.  Protestant  churches,  and 
therefore  their  ministry,  is.  valid.  But  the  necessity  of  even 
this  succession  or  appointment,  in  some,  extraordinary  cases,, 
it  would  be  difficult  to  establish,  As  we  learn,  from  our 
text,  the  scripture  commands  us  to  test  those  who  come  un- 
to us  by  their  doctrines,  before  we  "bid  them  God  speed,' ' 
but  does  it  say  any  thing  about  their  apostolic  succession  ? 
Accordingly,  Luther,  and  many  distinguished  Lutheran 
divines,  maintain,  in  accordance  with  our  brethren  of  tho 
Congregational  church,  that  whenever  necessity  requires, 
it,  the  congregation  of  believers  have  the  power  to  elect 
and  constitute  one  of  their  number  as  pastor.3 

Having  thus  glanced  at  the  origin  of  the  Lutheran  church, 
we  proceed  to  inquire, 

I.  What  were  her  primitive  features  ? 

The  first  feature  embraces  the  fundamental  principle 
adopted  by  the  church. 

"  The  great  and  leading  principle  of  the  Lutheran  church," 
says  Dr.  Mosheim,4  "  is  that  the  holy  scriptures  arc  the  only 
source,  whence  we  are  to  draw  our  religious  sentiments, 

(1)  Bellarm.  Lib.  Just.  cap.  8.  Sacramcntum  non  conficiatur  sine  in-. 
tentione  ministri,  et  inteniionem  alterins  nemo  videre  possit.  See  "Wad- 
dell's  Letters  to  editor  of  Catholic  Miscellany,  p.  13;  New  York,  1830. 

(2)  See  Appendix,  note  A.  (3)  See  Appendix,  note  G. 
(4}  Vol.  iii,  p.  208  of  his  Eccles.  Hist. 

5 


50  PORTRAITURE  OF  LUTHERANISM-. 

whether  they  relate  to  faith  or  practice ;  and  that  these  in- 
spired writings  are,  in  all  matters  that  are  essential  to  salva- 
tion, so  plain,  and  so  easy  to  be  thoroughly  understood,  that 
their  signification  may  be  learned,  without  the  aid  of  an  expos- 
itor, by  every  person  of  common  sense,  who  has  a  competent 
knowledge  of  the  language  in  which  they  are  composed. 
There  are  indeed  certain  formularies  adopted  by  this  church, 
which  contain  the  principal  points  of  its  doctrine,  ranged  for 
the  sake  of  method  and  perspicuity,  m  their  natural  order. 
But  these  books  have  no  authority  but  what  they  derive 
from  the  scriptures  of  truth,  whose  sense  and  meaning  they 
are  designed  to  convey."  This  was  the  noble  principle 
adopted  by  the  Lutheran  church,  a  principle  which  has  the 
cordial  assent  of  every  Lutheran  in  the  present  day,  and  in  re- 
gard to  which  our  only  regret  is,  that  though  it  was  adopted  in 
theory  by  all  the  Protestant  churches,  not  one  of  them  had  yet- 
light  and  grace  and  charity  enough  consistently  to  practice  it. 

The  principal  books  here  referred  to  as  subsidiary  to  the 
bible,  were  of  two  classes:  first,  the  confessions  of  the  prim- 
itive centuries,  the  so-called  Apostles'  Creed,  the  Kicene 
Creed,  and  the  Athanasian  Confession,  by  which  the  Luth- 
eran church  established  her  identity  with  the  church  of  the 
apostolic  and  succeeding  ages;  and,  secondly,  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  composed  by  Melancthon,  and  presented  before 
the  Emperor  Charles  V.,  at  the  diet  in  1530;  the  Apology 
or  Defense  of  this  Confession  by  the  same  hand ;  the  Smal- 
cald  Articles  by  Luther,  and  also  his  Catechisms. 

The  prominent  doctrines  taught  in  these  books,  may  be 
regarded  as  the  second  feature.  They  are  none  other  than 
those  commonly  termed  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  the 
doctrines  which,  with  few  variations,  are  held  in  common  by 
all  the  so-called  orthodox  churches.  They  are  among  others 
the  following : 

First  The  doctrine  of  the  trinity  of  persons  in  one  God- 
head ;  or  to  use  the  language  of  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
"  That  there  is  one  divine  essence  which  is  called  and  is  God, 
eternal,  incorporeal,  indivisible,  infinite  in  power,  wisdom 
and  goodness — and  yet  that  there,  are  three  persons,  who  are 
of  the  same  essence  and  power  and  are  co-eternal,  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit."1 

(1)  Art.  i,  p.  44  of  Pojdar  Theology. 


PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHERANISJI.  51 

Secondly.  These  books  also  teach  the  proper  and  eternal 
divinity  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  all  its  amplitude.  Their 
-language  is :  That  the  Word,  that  is,  the  Son  of  God,  as- 
sumed human  nature,  in  the  womb  of  the  blessed  virgin 
Mary,  so  that  the  two  natures,  human  and  divine,  inseparably 
-united  into  one  person,  constitute  one  Christ,  who  is  true 
<xod  and  man."1 

Tldrdly.  The  universal  depravity  of  our  race.  Their  lan- 
guage is  :  "Since  the  fall  of  Adam,  all  men  who  are  natural- 
ly engendered,  are  born  with  a  depraved  nature,  that  is, 
without  the  fear  of  God,  or  confidence  towards  him,  but  with 
sinful  propensities,"2 

Fourthly.  On  the  Atonement  they  teach  its  vicarious  nature 
and  unlimited  extent.  Says  the  Augsburg  Confession  :  "  The 
Son  of  God,  truly  suffered,  was  crucified,  died,  and  was 
buried,  that  he  might  reconcile  the  Father  to  us,  and  be  a 
sacrifice  not  only  for  original  sin,  but  also  for  all  the  actual 
sins  of  men."  He  also  sanctifies  "those  who  believe  in  him, 
by  sending  into  their  hearts  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  governs, 
consoles,  quickens  and  defends  them  against  the  devil  and 
the  power  of  sin."3 

Fifthly.  On  Justification  they  teach,  "That  men  cannot 
be  justified  before  God  by  their  own  strength,  merits  or 
works  ;  but  that  they  are  justified  gratuitously,  for  Christ's 
sake,  through  faith."4 

Sixthly.  Concerning  a  Holy  Life,  or  Good  Works,  they 
teach,  "That  this  faith  must  bring  forth  good  fruits;  and 
that  it  is  our  duty  to  perform  those  good  works  which  God 
has  commanded,  because  he  has  enjoined  them,  and  not  in 
the  expectation  of  thereby  meriting  justification  before  him."5 

Seventhly.  Concerning  The  Ministerial  Office  and  the  Means 
of  Grace,  the  Augsburg  Confession  declares  :  "In  order  that 
we  may  obtain  this  faith,  the  ministerial  office  has  been 
instituted,  whose  members  are  to  preach  the  gospel  and  ad- 
minister the  sacraments,"  (namely,  baptism  and  the  Lord's 
supper.)  "  For  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  word  and 
sacraments,  as  means  of   grace,   the  Holy  Spirit  is  given, 

(Is,  Art.  iii.  p.  130 

(2)  Art.  ii.  p   123. 

(3)  Aug.  Confession,  Art.  iii.  p.  131. 

(4)  Art.  iv.  p.  131. 

(5)  Aug.  Confession,  Art.  vi.  p.  165. 


52  PORTRAITURE  OF  LUTH5RANISM, 

who  in  his  own  time  and  place,  produces  faith  in  those  who 
hear  the  gospel  message,  namely,  that  God,  for  Christ's 
sake,  and  not  on  account  of  any  merit-in  us,  justifies  those 
who  believe  in  Christ.""1 

An<\.  finally,  of  the  Future  Judgment,  and  world  of  retribu- 
tion, the  same  Confession  teaches,2  that  at  the  end  of  the 
world,  Christ  will  appear  for  judgment;  that  he  will  raise 
all  the  dead  ;  that  he  will  give  to  the. pious  and  elect  eternal 
life  and  endless  joys :  but  will  condemn  wicked  men  and 
devils  to  be  punished  without  end."  Such  are  the  prom- 
inent doctrines  avowed  by  the  Lutheran  church  in  the 
beginning,  all  of  which  are  at  this  day  received  by  the 
entire  Lutheran  church  in  this  country. 

The  third  feature  is  her  government.  "  The  Govern- 
ment of  the  Lutheran  church,"  (in  Europe,)  says  Dr. 
Mosheim  ;"3  seems  equally  removed  trom  episcopacy  on  the 
one  hand  and  from  Presbyterianism  on  the  other,  if  we 
except  the  kingdoms  of  Sweden  and  Denmark,  which  retain 
the  form  of  ecclesiastical  government  that  preceded  the  Re- 
formation, purged  indeed  from  the  superstitions  and  abuses 
that  rendered  it  so  odious.4  The  Lutherans  are  persuaded 
that  there  is  no  law  of  divine  authority  which  points  out  a 
distinction  between  the  ministers  of  the  gospel  with  respect 
to  rank,  dignity  or  prerogatives :  and  therefore  they  recede 
from  episcopacy"5  On  the  other  hand,  the  early  reformers 
having  been  trained  under  the  aristocratic  governments  of 
Europe,  and  accustomed  to  the  imparity  of  Romanism,  re- 
garded some  diversity  in  the  authority,  rank  and  duties  of 
ministers  as  conducive  to  order  and  harmony.  Hence,  with 
the  universal  acknowledgment  of  the  parity  of  ministers  by 
divine  right,  they  introduced    some    subordination    on  the 

(1)  Art.  v.  p.  148. 

(2)  Aug.  Confession,  Art.  xvii.  p.  288 

(3)  Eccl.  History,  vol.  iii.  p.  211,  212. 

(4)  On  this  subject.  Dr.  Mnclaine,  the  distinguished  translator  of  Mos- 
Iieim's  History,  uses  this  language  :  "  The  archbishop  of  Tpsal  is  primate  of 
Sweden,  and  the  only  archbishop  among  the  Lutherans.  The  luxury  and 
licentiousness  that  too  commonly  flow  from  the  opulence  of  the  Eoman 
Catholic  clergy,  are  unknown  in  these  two  northern  states  ;  since  the 
revenues  of  the  prelate  now  mentioned,  do  not  amount  to  more  than  four 
hundred  pounds  yearly,  while  thoce  of  the  bishops  are  proportionablj 
small."     Vol.  iii. 'p.  211. 

(5)  Mosheim's  Eccl.  History,  vol.  iii.  p.  212. 


PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHER AN ISM.  53 

ground  of  human  expediency,  and  designated  those  to 
whom  the  supervision  of  certain  districts  was  confided, 
superintendents,  consistorial  counsellors,  inspectors,  <fec.  In 
the  United  States  entire  parity  is  maintained,  and  even  the 
nominal  office  of  Senior  Ministerii,  is  retained  by  only  one 
out  of  all  our  synods.  And  as  Dr.  Henke  very  justly 
remarks,  the  assertion,  that  Sweden  and  Denmark  retained 
the  ofiice  of  bishop,  can  be  made  only  by  special  latitude 
of  speech,  by  using-  the  term  bishop  for  an  office  divested 
of  the  mystic  idea  of  higher  or  holier  dignity,  sometimes 
attached  to  the  name.1  Even  in  what  was  then  the  dutehy 
of  Prussia,  two  of  these  officers  were  still  termed  bishops, 
fifty  years  after  the  Reformation,  namely,  the  Pomesanisch 
and  the  Samlcendisch  bishops.2  And  Frederick  William, 
the  late  king  of  Prussia,  amid  other  arbitrary  acts  of  inter- 
ference with  ecclesiastical  matters,  again  conferred  the  title 
of  diocesan  bishop  on  several  favorites,  much  to  the  dis- 
pleasure of  the  great  mass  of  German  divines.  In  this 
country,  although  our  ministers  are  strenuous  advocates  of 
parity,  they  pretty  extensively  favor  the  idea  of  returning 
to  the  use  of  the  word  bishop  in  its  scriptural  sense,  in  which, 
according  to  the  concession  of  many  of  the  most  distinguish- 
ed advocates  of  inparity,  it  was  synonymous  with  elder,  or 
preacher,  and  is  applicable  to  every  minister  of  the  gospel ; 
the  sense  in  which  as  Luke  informs  us,  instead  of  one  bishop 
having  oversight  over  a  large  district  of  country  or  diocese, 
there  were  several  bishops  in  the  one  city  Ephesus."3 

In  Europe,  where  the  unhappy  union  between  church  and 
state,  established  by  the  emperor  Constantino  in  the  fourth 
century,  still  continues,  the  civil  rulers  exercise  more  or  less 
influence  in  all  the  churches.  But  in  this  country,  the  Luth 
eran  church  in  common  with  her  Protestant  sister  churches, 
deprecates  as  unwarranted  and  dangerous  all  interference 
of  civil  government  in  religious  affairs  ;  excepting  the  mere 
protection  of  all  denominations  and  all  individuals  in  the 
unrestricted  right  to  worship  in  any  and  every  way  they 
think  proper. 

(1)  Hehcke'a  Kircheri^-eschichte,  13.  iii.  s.  303. 

(2)  II cuke  iii.  p.  364". 

(3)  Acts  xx.  2d.  To  the  ciders,  i.  e.  ministers  of  Ephesr.s,  Paul  says  : 
"Take  heed  of  the  flock  over  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  made  you  over- 
seers," or  as  the  Greek  is,  bishops. 

5a 


54       PORTRAITURE  OF  LUTHERANISM. 

The  fourth  feature  of  Lutheranism,  is  found  in  her 
Liturgies  and  festivals,  In  all  the  different  countries  of  Eu- 
rope and  in  America,  our  churches  have  liturgies,  differing 
m  minor  points,  but  agreeing  in  essentials.  These  are  used 
more  or  less  in  public  "worship,  and  serve  as  a  directory  in 
the  performance  of  the  different  ministerial  functions.     These 

liturgies  are  about  one-third  as  lonsr  as  those  of  the  Protest- 
er   _  o 

ant  Episcopal  church  ;  and,  as  to  character  and  contents, 
very  similar  to  them.  In  the  United  States,  we  have  adopted 
a  short  liturgy,  which  it  is  left  optional  with  each  minister  t© 
use  as  often  or  as  seldom  as  he  may  judge  most  conducive 
to  edification.  In  regard  to  such  forms  our  own  impression 
is,  that  when  properly  constructed,  they  tend  to  give  fixed- 
ness, tangibility  and  definiteness  to  christian  worship  in  the 
popular  mind  ;  but  they  should  be  short,  lest  when  frequent- 
ly repeated,  they  tire  ;  nor  should  they  be  exclusively  used, 
lest  they  degenerate  into  mere  instruments  of  formality. 

As  to  ecclesiastical  festivals,  of  human  appointment,  those 
only  are  observed  which  were  instituted  to  commemorate 
the  fundamental  facts  of  the  christian  religion,  such  as  the 
nativity,  death,  resurrection  and  ascension  of  the  Son  of 
•God,  and  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  day  of 
OPentecost.  As  Christianity  is  a  religion  based  upon  these 
ifacts  ;  it  is  important  that  the  recollection  of  them,  in  their 
literal,  historical  import,  be  cherished  by  her  professors* 
.And  as  ministers  rarely  preach  once  a  year  on  each  of 
:  these  topics,  unless  called  on  by  some  such  custom  ;  we  re- 
gard the  influence  of  these  festivals  as  salutary  in  their 
•appropriate  design  ;  and  the  abuses  which  are  practiced  on 
them  in  some  places  by  the  irreligious,  are  not  necessary 
consequences  of  them,  and  should  be  obviated. 

But  this  portraiture  of  Lutheranism  would  be  incomplete, 
were  we  to  omit  the  fifth  feature,  her  particular  attention 
to  the  religious  instruction  of  the  children  of  the  church,  and 
■habit  of  calling  on  them,  when  they  attain  years  of  discre- 
tion, personally  to  confirm  and  assume  the  vows  made  for 
them  at  their  baptism.  The  Lutheran  church,  believing 
that  God  has  not  revoked  in  the  New  Testament,  the  insti- 
tution of  infant  membership  in  his  church,  which  he  estab- 
lished in  the  Old,  receives  into  her  bosom  both  the  actual 
and  adopted  children  of  professed  believers,  by  the  initiatory 
rite  of  baptism,,  according  to  the  Saviour's  command.     Hay- 


PORTRAITURE     OF     L  U  T  II  E  R  A  N  1  S  M  .  55 

ing  thus  received  them,  she  treats  them  accordingly.  From 
the  days  of  the  Reformation  the  Lutheran  church  inculcated 
it  as  a  principal  duty  of  her  ministers  and  members  to 
provide  for  the  adequate  instruction  of  the  children  of  the 
church  in  the  doctrines  of  our  holy  religion.  In  this 
country,  where  in  most  cases,  each  minister  has  charge  of 
three  or  four  churches,  his  personal  instructions  cannot  well 
reach  all  the  children  with  sufficient  frequency ;  yet  it  is 
regarded  as  the  duty  of  every  minister,  occasionally  to 
convene  the  children  of  each  congregation  for  instruction 
in  the  catechism  ;  and  that  minister  will  prove  most  success- 
ful, and  best  deserve  the  confidence  of  his  charge,  who,  by 
the  establishment  of  a  Sabbath  School  in  every  congregation, 
and  the  employment  of  the  pious  members  of  his  charge, 
brings  the  lambs  of  his  flock,  and  all  others  who  are  with- 
out a  shepherd,  and  are  appropriately  within' the  sphere  of 
his  labors,  under  full  and  stated  influence  of  the  doetrines 
and  precepts  of  the  gospel.  Annually  also,  and  if  necessary 
oftener,  the  minister  holds  a  series  of  meetings  with  those 
who  are  applicants  for  admission  to  sacramental  communion, 
or  as  in  reference  to  the  infant  baptism  of  the  applicant.,  it 
is  called,  confirmation.  To  these  meetings  are  invited  all 
who  feel  a  concern  for  their  salvation,  and  especially  all 
those  subjects  of  infant  baptism,  who  have  attained  years 
of  discretion.  "  Every  meeting  is  opened  by  singing  and 
prayer,  and  closed  by  an  address  to  the  throne  of  grace. 
The  time  of  the  first  meeting,  is  chiefly  occupied  by  ths 
•pastor  in  explaining  the  object  of  the  contemplated  course 
of  instruction  in  as  solemn  and  impressive  a  manner  as 
possible.  This  object  he  states  to  be,  not  merely  the  ac- 
quisition of  doctrinal  knowledge — nor  merely  the  admission 
to  the  Lord's  table  ;  for  Paul  tells  us,  that  many  eat  and 
drink  judgment  to  themselves.  But  says  the  zealous  pas- 
tor who  feels  the  eternal  importance  of  this  solemn  occa- 
sion, the  object  is  to  show  you  in  so  plain  and  simple  a 
manner,  that  you  cannot  foil  to  understand  it,  the  natural 
depravity  of  your  hearts,  your  habitual  and  base  rebellion 
against  your  best  benefactor,  your  father  and  your  God, 
and  your  danger  of  being  shut  out  forever  from  his  blissful 
presence  ;  to  shew  you  that  you  must  be  born  again,  or  be 
eternally  excluded  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  I 
you  such  instructions  and  directions  from  day  to  day,  as  will 


56  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERANISM. 

if  faithfully  pursued,  sooner  or  later,  certainly  eventuate  in 
your  conversion  to  God.1  Every  succeeding  meeting  is 
occupied  in  conversational  lectures  on  experimental  religion, 
and  in  the  examination  of  the  catechumen  on  the  funda- 
mental doctrines  and  duties  of  religion  as  contained  in  the 
bible  and  Luther's  Catechism.  These  meetings  afford  to 
the  faithful  pastor  better  opportunities  of  access  to  the 
hearts  of  the  rising  generation  in  his  church,  than  are  en- 
joyed by  any  denomination  who  neglect  this  practice.  At 
the  close  of  these  meetings,  which  are  continued  through 
from  six  to  twelve  weeks  once  or  twice  each  week,  and  in 
the  last  if  convenient  daily,  the  church  council  are  convened 
to  examine  the  catechumens  on  their  qualifications  for 
sacramental  communion.  It  is  here  that  our  practice  is 
sometimes  less  rigid  than  it  ought  to  be.  The  council 
should  faithfully  examine  every  applicant,  and  admit  none 
but  such  as  give  evidence  of  living  faith  in  that  Redeemer, 
whose  dying  love  they  wish  to  commemorate.  Although  in 
the  hands  of  an  unconverted  minister  this  duty,  like  all 
others,  will  be  mere  formality,  and  attended  with  little 
profit ;  yet  we  have  never  met,  nor  do  we  expect  to  meet  a 
pious  minister,  who  faithfully  practised  this  system,  and  did 
not  regard  it  as  a  most  blessed  and  successful  method  of 
bringing  souls  to  Christ.  After  an  experience  and  observa- 
tion of  thirty  years  in  the  ministry,  we  cannot  but  regard 
this  practice  faithfully  pursued,  as  one  of  the  glories  of  the 
Lutheran  church. 

Having  occupied  much  time  in  delineating  the  primitive 
features  of  the  Lutheran  church,  a  few  words  must  suffice  on 
the  subject  of 

III.  Her  extension. 

After  her  establishment  in  Germany  by  the  labors  of 
Luther,  Melancthon  and  others,  about  1525,  when  the 
Elector  John,  of  Saxony,  first  publicly  adopted  the  amended 
system,  the  Lutheran  doctrines  were  introduced  into  Sweden, 
by  the  instrumentality  of  Olaus  Petri  in  1527,  under  the 
sanction  of  king  Gustavus  Vasa  Ericson.2  Into  Denmark 
the  Lutheran  doctrines  were  fully  introduced  in  1527,  in  the 

(1)  Popular  Theology,  p.  230,  231,  ed.  2. 

(2)  Sec  Appendix,  note  B. 


PORTRAITURE    OF    LUT-H-K  R  AN  ISM.  67 

reign  of  Frederick,  after  some  preparatory  steps  by  Christiern 
II.  The  Lutheran  church  is  also  established  in  Norway,  in 
Lapland,  Finland,  and  Iceland;  and  has  some  congregations 
in  Hungary,  France  and  Asia. 

In  Russia  the  Lutheran  population  amounts  to  2,600,000 
with  500  ministers.1  In  the  United  States,  the  first  Lutheran 
churches  were  established  by  the  Swedes,  who  emigrated  to 
this  country  and  settled  on  the  banks  of  the  Delaware  during 
the  reign  of  queen  Christina,  and  under  the  sanction  of  her 
prime  minister,  Oxenstiern,  about  the  year  1636,  sixteen  or 
seventeen  years  after  the  settlement  of  New  England  by  the 
pilgrim  fathers,  and  about  thirty  years  after  the  establish- 
ment of  an  English  colony  in  Virginia.  As  these  churches 
were  few  in  number,  and  received  no  accessions  from  the 
mother  country,  the  Swedish  language  was  soon  lost  by  the 
rising  generation,  and  preaching  in  the  English  tongue  was 
necessary  long  before  any  of  our  German  pastors  officiated 
in  that  language.  Under  these  circumstances  recourse  was 
had  to  our  Episcopal  brethren  for  English  ministrations,  and 
thus  these  churches  gradually  became  connected  with  that 
denomination ;  though  by  their  charter  they  are  still  styled 
Swedish  Lutheran  churches.2 

The  next  Lutheran  establishment  was  by  Lutherans  from 
Holland,  who  erected  a  Lutheran  church  in  the  city  of  New 
York  in  1703,  in  which  worship  was  conducted  in  the  Hol- 
land, the  English,  and  afterwards  also  in  the  German 
tongue.3 

The  first  German  Lutheran  churches  in  this  country,  were 
regularly  organized  by  Rev.  Messrs.  Bolz'ms  and  Gronau, 
in  1733;  and  in  1742,  'by  Henry  Mdbhior  Muldenherg,  one 
of  the  patriarchs  of  American  Lutheranism.  This  indefati- 
gable and  talented  servant  of  Christ,  whilst  located  in  the 
city  of  New  York,  was  in  the  habit  of  preaching  in  the 
German,  the  Holland,  and  the  English  languages,  every 
Lord's  day.  Had  his  successors  followed  his  noble  exam- 
ple, and  qualified  themselves  to  preach  in  the  English  lan- 

(1)  See  Rcinwald's  Repertoriuni. 

(2)  Annals  of  the  Swedes  on  the  Delaware,  by  Rev.  J.  C.  Clay.  p.  3,  4, 
161,  &c.  Also  Schubert's  Schwedische  Kircheuverfassung,  vol.  ii.  p.  439 
-442. 

(3)  See  "Authentic  Account  of  a  Bill  in  Chancery,"  New  York,  p.  4, 
&c. 


58  PORTRAITURE    OF    LU'TH  E  R  A  N  I  S  M. 

guage  wherever  it  was  necessary,  the  Lutheran  church 
would  at  this  day  be  twice  as  numerous  in  this  country  as 
it  is. 

We  have,  at  present,  (1840,)  about  350  ministers  and 
1000  churches  ;l  and  amid  the  long  catalogue  of  distin- 
guished  divines,  who  have  since  wielded  the  interests  and 
advanced  the  cause  of  our  Zion,  and  have  entered  on  their 
celestial  inheritance,  what  friend  of  the  church  does  not 
delight  to  name  a  Kunze,  a  Schmidt,  a  Kurtz,  another 
Muhlenberg,  a  Goring,  a  Helmuth,  a  Melsheimer,  a  Storch, 
■an  Endress,  a  Lochman,  a  Schaeffer,  a  Ruthraufi",  a  Sho- 
ber,  a  Geissenhainer  ? 

The  entire  Lutheran  population  in  the  world  is  estimated 
by  accurate  authors  at  from  25  to  30,000,000. 

In  literary  and  theological  institutions,  in  learned  tlieole- 
■gians,  and  in  a  rich  and  learned  theological  literature,2  the 
Lutheran  church  has  confessedly  surpassed  all  others. 
Gratitude  for  the  numerous  and  signal  advantages,  reaped 
by  the  cause  of  reformation  from  the  superior  learning  of 
her  advocates,  and  the  obvious  facilities  rendered  by  th« 
revival  of  letters  previously  to  the  reformation,  taught  the 
Protestant  princes  to  regard  learning  as  a  special  gift  of 
God,  to  deliver  them  from  the  bondage  of  the  dark  ao-es. 
Numerous  literary  institutions  were  therefore  founded  at  an 
«arly  day,  and  others  enlarged.  Among  the  former  are 
the  universities  of  Jena  (1558,)  and  Konigsberg ;  among 
the  latter  Wittenberg  and  Leipsic.  At  this  day  there  are 
in  Germany  nine  universities,  wholly  Lutheran,3  one4  be- 
longing jointly  to  the  Lutherans  and  Reformed,  and  four5 
to  the  Lutherans,  Reformed  and  Catholics  in  conjunction. 
In  Sweden  there  are  two  Lutheran  universities,  and  in  Nor- 
way one.  By  the  attention  of  the  Protestants  to  learning 
and  learned  institutions,  enlightened  advocates  for  the  truth 
were  provided,  and  a  pious,  learned  literature  was  formed 


(1)  Now,  (in  1851,)  this  number  is  850  ministers,  and  about  2000  con- 
gregations. Of  the  ministers,  nearly  one-half  are  natives  of  Germany,  lo- 
•cated  principally  in  the  Mississippi  Valley. 

(2)  See  Appendix,  note  C. 

(3)  Leipsic,  Rostock,  Greifswalde,  Jena,  Giessen,  Kiel,  Halle,  Gottingen, 
and  Erlangen  universities. 

(4)  At  Berlin. 

(5)  Heidelberg,  Tubingen,  Breslau  and  Bonn. 


FOE  TRAIT  IT  RE    OF    LUTHERAN  ISM.  59 

at  an  early  day,  to  spread  its  purifying  and  enlightening 
influence  over  Europe  and  the  civilized  world.  Had  Lu- 
ther, Melancthon,  Calvin  and  Zwingle  not  been  men  of 
distinguished  learning,  they  could  never  have  drawn  from 
the  stores  of  sacred  and  patristic  literature,  the  facts  which 
subverted  the  corrupt  pretensions  of  the  papists,  and  erected 
a  fabric  of  truth,  which  remains  to  this  day  the  admiration 
of  the  world.  How  incalculably  would  not  the  Lutheran 
church  in  this  country  have  gained  in  efficiency,  in  exten- 
sion, in  respectability,  in  usefulness,  had  our  fathers  a  cen- 
tury, or  even  fifty  years  ago,  laid  the  foundation  of  some  of 
the  institutions  which  have  since  then  been  established? 
Now  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  country  has  four  theolog- 
ical seminaries  in  operation,  and  at  least  partially  endowed, 
and  one  college1  under  its  particular  patronage.  In  the 
seminary  at  Gettysburg  alone,  upwards  of  one  hundred2 
ministers  have  been  trained  in  fifteen  years,  who  are  now 
preaching  to  thousands,  the  unsearchable  riches  of  Christ, 
and  a  large  number  have  proceeded  from  our  other  schools 
of  the  prophets  at  Hartwiek,  at  Lexington  and  at  Columbus. 
Let  these  institutions  therefore  share  our  warmest  prayers, 
and  our  most  zealous  efforts  ;  and  let  no  Lutheran  rest  sat- 
isfied, until  they  are  all  adequately  endowed. 
We  proceed  to  contemplate 

IV.  The  progressive  development  or  improvement  of 
the  Lutheran  church. 

Luther  had  wisely  regarded  the  reformation  as  unfinished, 
and  exhorted  his  followers  to  turn  away  from  his  works,  and 
study  the  bible  more  attentively.3  Unfortunately  for  the 
eause  of  truth  and  peace,  the  admiration  of  many  of  his 
followers,  degenerated  into  excessive  veneration;  and  death, 
which  translated  him  to  the  abode  of  peace  in  heaven,  made 
his  writings,  the  source  of  rancorous  contention  on  earth, 
imparted  a  kind  of  canonical  authority  to  them.     Moreover, 


(1)  The  number  of  Theological  Seminaries  is  now  increased  to  six.  and 
that  of  the  colleges  to  three,  by  tbe  erection  of  institutions  at  Springfield, 
Ohio,  Hillsborough,  Illinois,  and  Columbus,  Ohio. 

(2)  This  number  has  increased  to  250. 

(3)  •"  I  have  not  kept  a  list  of  my  publications,  nor  have  I  all  the  works 
themselves;  for  I  desire  much  rather  that  the  Bible  alone  should  be  studied 
instead  of  my  works."— Letter  to  TJrsinus,  1527-  Ihl.  21,  p.  1031. 


60  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHER  AN  ISM. 

as  the  claurch,  established  by  his  instrumentality,  was  desig- 
nated by  his  name,  his  works  gradually  were  regarded  as 
the  standards  of  orthodoxy,  and  all  attempts  to  continue  the 
work  of  reformation  so  gloriously  commenced  by  him,  were 
denounced  as  treason  to  his  cause  !  !  "  Even,  during  his 
lifetime,"  says  the  distinguished  historian  Henke,  "there 
were  some  who  followed  him  with  a  slavish  servility.  A 
species  of  canonization  of  this  great  man  had  already  taken 
place  ;  and  he  was  not  unfrequently  known  by  the  names, 
megalander,  man  of  God,  second  Elias,  the  last  prophet, 
&c. ;  and  when  he  died,  it  seemed  as  if  an  oracle  had  been 
struck  dumb." 

Had  not  the  church  been  denominated  by  the  name  of 
this  distinguished  servant  of  Christ ;  had  not  his  works  but 
the  bible  been  regarded  as  the  grand  source  of  religious 
light,  as  the  grand  subject  of.  continued  study;  and  had  the 
Augsburg  Confession  alone  been  received  as  an  auxiliary 
test ;  the  church  would  have  enjoyed  much  more  peace,  and 
the  whole  field  of  doctrine,  except  the  few  points  deter- 
mined in  that  confession,  would  have  been  open  to  free 
continued  study  and  scrutiny  in  the  light  of  God's  word. 
But  instead  of  finding  fault  with  those  theological  heroes, 
who  vanquished  the  hosts  of  Rome,  for  not  accomplishing 
every  thing ;  we  should  be  grateful  to  God  that  they  were 
enabled  to  effect  so  much. 

The  first  feature  of  improvement  to  which  we  will  advert, 
is  the  entiw  rejection  of  the  authority  of  the  Fathers  in  ecclesi- 
astical controversy.  The  grand  mistake  of  the  earlier  reform- 
ers was  their  appeal  to  this  authority.  They  were,  indeed, 
enabled  with  these  weapons,  to  overturn  the  corruptions  in- 
troduced into  the  church  after  the  rise  of  the  papal  hierar- 
chy ;  but  they  also  compelled  themselves  to  retain  such  er- 
rors as  were  of  earlier  date.  The  writings  of  the  fathers  in- 
stead of  being  good  authority  for  scripture  doctrine,  are  a 
perfect  labyrinth  of  theological  errors,  from  which  it  is  im- 
possible to  escape  with  safety,  and  in  which  we  look  in  vain 
for  that  unanimons  consent  which  Rome  has  so  loudly  boast- 
ed. But  it  is  easy  to  establish  by  the  authority  of  Ante- 
nicene  fathers,  the  several  errors  retained  by  the  earlier 
reformers,  and  since  rejected  by  the  mass  of  Protestants. 

In  short  it  is  a  principle  which  the  experience  of  ages 
has  clearly  established,  that  in  all  controversies  about  the 


PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHER  AN  ISJff .  61 

proper  doctrines,  or  duties,  or  forms  of  Christianity,  the 
bible,  the  whole  bible,  and  nothing  but  the  bible,  must  be  the 
armor  of  the  Protestant.  To  concede  to  Romanists  or  oth- 
ers the  necessity  of  an  appeal  to  patristic  authority,  is  a 
tacit  denial  of  the  word  of  God,  as  the  sufficient  and  only 
rule  of  faith  and  practice,  the  only  ground  on  which  Protest- 
antism can  be  permanently  and  triumphantly  sustained. 

Another  feature  of  improvement  in  the  Lutheran  church 
consists  in  her  no  longer  requiring  assent  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
real  presence  of  the  Saviour  in  theeucharist}  On  this  subject 
her  views  have  not  unfrequently  been  misapprehended  and 
misstated.  It  is  indeed  true,  that  she  did  entertain  opinions 
on  this  topic  different  from  the  other  churches.  This  differ- 
ence was  however  by  no  means  so  great  as  is  at  present  sup- 
posed by  the  less  intelligent  part  of  the  community.  Calvin 
and  the  early  English  reformers,  employed  language  nearly, 
and  in  some  cases,  quite  as  strong  as  that  found  in  the 
Lutheran  symbols.  The  x\ugsburg  Confession  affirms,  "that 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  actually  present  (vere 
adsint),  and  the  German  copy  adds,  under  the  form  or  em- 
blems of  bread  and  wine  and  dispensed  to  the  communicants. "^ 
Calvin  employs  language  about  as  strong  :  he  says  in  the- 
mystery  of  the  supper,  by  the  emblems  of  bread  and  wine, 
Christ  is  really  exhibited  to  us,  that  is,  his  body  and  blood,' 
in  which  he  yielded  full  obedience,  in  order  to  work  out  a 
righteousness  for  us ;  by  which,  in  the  first  place,  we  may, 
as  it  were,  coalesce  into  one  body  with  him;  and,  secondly, 
being  made  partakers  of  the  substance  of  himself,  also 
be  strengthened  by  the  reception  of  every  blessing.3     In 

(1)  From  this,  and  the  other  items  of  this  part  of  our  discourse,  the  in- 
telligent reader  will  perceive  what  gross  misrepresentations  are  circulated, 
ignorantly  we  trust,  by  the  publishers  of  Buck's  Theological  Dictionary, 
and  by  such  living  authors  as  Mr.  Goodrich,  (in  his  Eccles.  Hist.)  who 
represent  the  Lutheran  church  of  the  present  day,  as  resembling  the  Ro- 
man Catholics  more  nearly  than  does  any  other  Protestant  church  !  After 
the  repeated  publications,  made  by  the  Lutherans  in  this  country,  it  is  un- 
worthy of  professed  historians  to  transmit  to  yet  another  generation  these 
hereditary  statements.  As  to  the  private  ministers,  who  occasionally  in- 
form their  hearers,  that  their  Lutheran  neighbors  believe  in  consubstantia- 
tion,  &c  as  we  wish  not  to  impute  intentional  misrepresentation,  we  must 
attribute  their  error  to  want  of  information. 

(2)  Augsburg  Confession,  Art.  x. 

(3)  Dico  igitur  in  cceuae  mysterio  per  symbola  panis  ct  vini  Christum 
vere  nobis  exhiberi,  adeoque  corpus  et  sanguinem  ejus,  in  quibus  omnem 

6 


62       PORTRAITURE  OF  LUTHERANISM. 

the  Episcopal  church,  Cranmer,  one  of  her  earliest  and 
ablest  reformers,  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  published 
his  translation  of  the  catechism  of  Justus  Jonas,  with 
amendments,  in  1548,  to  which  he  professed  to  adhere  till 
his  death,1  and  in  which  he  uses  this  language:  "Christ 
saith  of  the  bread  '  this  is  my  body ;'  and  of  the  cup  he 
saith  'this  is  my  blood.'  Wherefore  we  ought  to  believe 
that  in  the  sacrament  we  receive  truly  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ.  For  God  is  almighty  ;  he  is  able,  therefore,  to 
do  all  things  what  he  will."2  His  friend  and  fellow  martyr, 
Ridley,  at  his  last  trial  says  :  "I  agree  that  the  sacrament 
is  the  very  true  and  natural  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  even 
that  which  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  which  ascended 
into  heaven,  which  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God,  the 
Father,  which  shall  come  from  thence  to  judge  the  quick 
and  the  dead,  only  I  differ  in  the  way  and  manner  of 
being,"3  &c.  It  is  admitted,  these  same  writers  professed 
to  mean  a  spiritual  presence,  and  so  did  also  the  Lutheran 
reformers,  who  explicitly  declare  in  the  Formula  Concordice,* 
"By  that  word  (spiritually)  we  exclude  those  Capernaitish 
notions  concerning  a  gross  and  carnal  presence,  which  have 
been  attributed  to  our  churches  by  the  sacramentarians,  in 
defiance  of  all  our  public  protestations  against  them.  And 
when  we  use  this  term,  (spiritually,)  we  wish  to  be  under- 
stood as  signifying  that  the  body  and  blood  are  received, 
and  eaten,  and  drank  spiritually  in  the  Lord's  supper.  For 
although  the  participation  is  effected  by  the  mouth,  the  man- 
ner in  which  it  is  done  is  spiritual."  At  the  present  day,  it 
is  pretty  generally  agreed  by  Protestants,  that  to  talk  of  the 
spiritual  presence  of  a  material  body,  or  the  spiritual  eat- 
ing and  drinking  of  a  material  body  and  blood,  is  to  employ 
language  that  conveys  no  distinct  ideas.  We,  however, 
cheerfully  concede  that  the  other  Protestant  denominations 
relinquished   these  views   of   their  early  reformers,   more 

obedientiam  pro  comparanda  nobis  justitia  adimplevit :  quo  scilicet,  prim- 
urn,  in  unura  corpus  cum  ipso  coalescamus  ;  deinde  participes  substantia; 
ejus  facit,  in  bonorum  omnium  communicatione  virtutem  quoque  sentia- 
inus. — Institut,  Lib.  iv.  c.  xvii.  11. 

(1)  See  bis  works,  ii.  440;  iii.  13,  279,  344;  and  Hook's  Discourse, 
p.  96. 

(2)  Hook.  p.  96. 

(3)  Hook's  Discourse,  p.  99. 
'4)  Art.  vii,  No.  21,  p.  604. 


PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHER A NISM.  63 

speedily  and  with  less  controversy  than  did  the  Lutheran 
church.  It  was  indeed  reported  that  Luther  himself  shortly 
before  his  death,  in  a  confidential  conversation  with  Melanc- 
thon,  acknowledged  that  he  had  o-one  too  far  in  regard  to 
the  eucharist.  But,  much  as  we  should  be  pleased  to  be- 
lieve that  our  great  and  good  reformer  had  made  such  an 
acknowledgment,  the  evidence  appears  unsatisfactory ;  or 
at  most,  he  may  have  admitted,  that  he  had  exhibited  too 
much  warmth  in  the  controversy,  or  overrated  the  import- 
ance of  his  peculiar  views.1  At  the  present  day,  whilst 
some  shades  of  difference  exist  in  the  Lutheran  church,  all 
are  permitted  to  enjoy  their  opinions  in  peace,  and  the  most 
generally  received  view,  if  wre  mistake  not,  is  :  "That  there 
is  no  presence  of  the  glorified  human  nature  of  the  Saviour, 
either  substantial  or  influential ;  nor  any  thing  mysterious 
or  supernatural  in  the  eucharist ;  yet,  that  whilst  the  bread 
and  wine  are  merely  symbolic  representations  of  the  Sa- 
viour's absent  body,  by  which  we  are  reminded  of  his  suf- 
ferings, there  is  also  a  special  spiritual  blessing  bestowed  by 
the  divine  Saviour  on  all  worthy  communicants,  by  which 
their  faith  and  Christian  graces  are  confirmed.2 

The  third  item  of  improvement  is  the  relinquishment  of  a 
much  abused  custom  connected  with  the  preparation  for 
communion.  The  reformers  and  their  successors  had  sub- 
stantially repudiated  as  unscriptural  and  corrupting  what 
constituted  the  essential  features  of  Romish  private  confes- 
sion, namely  :  the  pretence  that  the  priest  is  in  the  place  of 
God ;  that  every  individual  sin,  even  the  secret  thoughts  and 
feelings  of  the  heart  must  be  individually  detailed  to  the 
priest,  as  essential  to  pardon ;  and  that  the  priest  possesses 
the  absolute  power  to  forgive  these  sins.  Yet  the  reformers 
deemed  it  useful,  that  before  communion,  each  communi- 
cant should  have  a  private  interview  with  the  pastor,  and 
give  him  an  account  of  the  state  of  his  soul,  and  his  pro- 
gress in  the  divine  life  ;  in  order  that  the  minister  might 
give  him  instruction  and  advice,  and  if  the  case  warranted 
it,  encourage  the  applicant  with  the  promise  of  pardon  from 
God.     This  custom,  in  order  to  give  as  little  offense  as  pos- 

(1)  It  is  said,  Melancthon  communicated  the  fact  to  Professor  Alesiua, 
of  Leipsic,  from  whom  Pfuhlman.  one  of  his  students,  heard  it. 

(2)  See  the  Author's  Popular  Theology,  p.  303,  5th  ed. 


-64  PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHER  ANISM. 

sible,  they  denominated,  though  very  inappropriately,  con- 
fession. They  had  rejected  the  thing,  and  therefore  it 
would  have  been  more  consistent  not  to  retain  the  name. 
Yet,  against  this  custom,  it  would  be  difficult  to  allege  any 
valid  objection,  except  its  misapprehension  and  consequent 
abuse  by  the  ignorant.  Thus  explained,  confession  was 
approved  by  Calvin,1  Peter  Martyr,2  Werenftls,3  Heidegger,4 
Hornbeck,5  Jurien,6  and  other  distinguished  Reformed  di- 
vines. But  even  this  custom  has  been  almost  entirely  aban- 
doned, and  the  preparation  for  communion  consists  in  a 
public  preparatory  discourse,  public  and  united  confession 
of  sins,  and  rehearsal  of  the  promises  of  divine  mercy,  sim- 
ilar to  the  preparatory  exercises  of  other  churches.  The 
only  difference  is,  that  in  the  Lutheran  and  Episcopal 
churches,  which  use  liturgies,  these  exercises  of  confession 
of  sins  and  exhibition  of  divine  promises  of  pardon,  are 
conducted  according  to  a  settled  form,  whilst  in  others  ihey 
are  extemporaneous.  Yet  in  the  numerous  Lutheran  litur- 
gies we  have  seen,  including  those  of  Sweden7  pnd  Norway, 
the  minister  never  professes  to  forgive  sins  himself,  nor  even 
to  announce  the  divine  promises  of  pardon  unconditionally 
to  all,  but  limits  them  to  truly  penitent  believers ;  whilst  the 
impenitent  and  unbelieving  are  expressly  told  that  God  will 
not  pardon  their  sins,  but  inflict  deserved  punishment  on 
them.  This  formal  annunciation  of  the  divine  promise  of 
forgiveness,  thus  conditionally  made,  is  edifying  to  intelli- 
gent minds,  especially  as  the  Saviour  himself,  in  the  words 
of  the  institution,  mentions  "remission  of  sins"  as  the  de- 
sign of  that  death  which  we  are  to  commemorate  in  the 
eucharist.  Yet  as  it  is  easily  perverted  into  certain  pardon 
by  the  less  informed,  who  may  erroneously  conceive  them- 
selves penitent,  and  as  the  scriptures  contain  no  special 
promise  of  pardon  at  communion,  more  than  in  the  perform- 
ance of  any  other  duty ;  the  utmost  caution  should  be  ob- 
served against  misapprehension,  and  the  annunciation  itself 

(1)  Institutions,  Christ.  Relig;  Lib.  iii.  cap.  iv.  12,  13  j  see  Appendix, 
note  E. 

(2)  Loci  Thcoloeici.  De  Poenitentia,  p.  1023. 

(3)  Opusc.  Theol.  Philosph.  et  Piiilolog.  Tom.  ii.  p.  320. 

(4)  Mauuduct.  in  viam  coiicorgirc  Protestautium,  Diatr.  i.  §  20,  p.  39. 

(5)  Koecher's  Vertheidigung.  p.  529. 

(6)  Consultat.  de  pace  Protest.  Pt.  ii.  cap.  xiii.  p.  272. 

(7)  Shubert's  Schwedische  Kircbenverfassung,  vol.  ii.  p.  63. 


PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERAN1SM.  65 

is  very  properly  often  thrown  into  the  form  of  a  prayer,1  as 
is  also  done  in  the  Episcopal  liturgy. 

The  fourth  item  of  improvement  is  the  entire  rejection  of 
every  remnant  of  papal  superstition  in  the  administration  of 
baptism.  The  Romanists  maintain,  that  unbaptized  persons 
are  possessed  by  evil  spirits,  and  that  the  priest  possesses 
the  power  by  adjuration  to  expel  them.  This  ceremony, 
termed  exorcism,  is  performed  by  the  priest  with  a  multitude 
of  formalities.  Luther,  and  the  other  early  reformers,  re- 
jected both  these  principles ;  yet  retained  some  kind  of  ad- 
juration as  a  symbolic  acknowledgment  of  the  natural  de- 
pravity of  all  men.  To  this  they  were  probably  led  by 
their  lingering  regard  for  the  early  fathers.  For,  something 
of  this  kind  was  practiced  even  in  the  third  century,  when 
the  corrupting  influence  of  the  !S"ew  Platonists  was  first 
felt  in  the  church ;  and  it  was  defended  by  such  men  as 
Cyprian2  and  Augustine.3  Yet  many  of  our  churches  were 
from  the  beginning  unwilling  to  retain  the  semblance  of  this 
ceremony,  even  as  a  declaration  of  natural  depravity,  and 
accordingly  it  was  totally  rejected  from  the  liturgy  and  di- 
rectory for  worship,  published  at  Augsburg  seven  years 
after  the  celebrated  diet  of  that  place,  namely  in  1 537 ;  as 
also  in  that  of  Strasburg,  published  in  1543,  of  Nuremberg-, 
published  in  the  same  year,  and  in  many  others.4  In  dif- 
ferent kingdoms  it  was  long  since  wholly  rejected,  whilst  in 
others,  phraseology  more  or  less  resembling  it  was  long 
retained. 

The  fifth  item  of  improvement  in  the  Lutheran  church  is 
the  more  systematic  adjustment  of  her  doctrines.  Luther 
was  so  incessantly  employed  in  the  great  work  of  reforming 
the  church  from  the  corruptions  and  superstitions  of  Rome, 
that  he  had  little  leisure  for  abstract  reflections  on  the  re- 
ciprocal  relations  of  the    scripture  doctrines,  and   on  the 

(1)  "Almighty  God,  our  Heavenly  Father,  who  of  his  great  mercy  hath 
promised  forgiveness  of  sins  to  all  those  who  with  hearty  repentance  and 
true  faith  turn  unto  him,  have  mercy  upon  you ;  pardon  and  deliver  you 
from  all  your  sins  ;  confirm  and  strengthen  you  in  all  goodness ;  and  bring 
you  to  everlasting  life,  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  Amen." — Episco- 
pal Communion  Service,  p.  155. 

(2)  Epist,  69,  p.  187 ;  Epist.  75.  p.  223. 

(3)  In  Lib.  de  Fide  et  operibus.  cap.  vi.  and  Lib.  7.  cap.  34,  contra  Pe- 
lagium.  Lib.  ii.  cap.  40.  and  Koecher's  Vertheidigung,  p.  509. 

(4^  Siegel's  Handbuch,  vol.  ii.  p.  6S6. 
6a 


66  PORTRAITURE  OF  LUTHEK  ANIS  M. 

entire  and  minute  consistency  of  his  views  with  each  other. 
It  is  certain  that  in  the  earlier  part  of  his  life,  he  believed 
the  Augustinian  view  of  predestination.  His  work,  on  the 
Bondage  of  the  Will,  published  in  1525,  must  put  this  ques- 
tion to  rest.  But  he  at  the  same  time  entertained  other 
views  inconsistent  with  this.  Melanchton,  who  had  era- 
braced  Luther's  unadjusted  views  of  doctrine,  led  the  way  in 
the  process  of  harmonizing  their  conflicting  elements,  by  the 
rejection  of  absolute  predestination.  Luther  himself  adopted 
these  modifications,  and  long  before  he  died,  preached  and 
taught  what  have  ever  since  been  the  doctrines  of  the  Lu- 
theran standards.  The  particulars  of  this  interesting  pro- 
cess are  detailed  in  Dr.  Plank's  invaluable  History  of  the 
Rise,  Changes  and  Formation  of  the  Protestant  System  of 
Doctrines.1  During  the  reign  of  infidelity  in  Europe,  when 
an  unbaptized  philosophy  had  desecrated  the  sanctuary  of 
God,  and  so  far  effaced  all  lineaments  and  extinguished  all 
attachment  to  genuine  pvotcstant  Christianity,  that  even  a 
Buonaparte  could  contemplate  as  a  matter  of  state  policy 
the  re-establishment  of  the  Romish  religion  over  all  protest- 
ant  Germany  ;2  the  doctrines  of  great  reformers  were  for- 
saken by  many.  But  thanks  be  to  God,  the  cause  of  truth 
is  again  prospering,  orthodoxy  is  again  preponderant  in 
Germany  ;  and  in  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  country  the 
great  doctrines  of  the  reformation  are  taught  as  universally, 
as  in  any  other  denomination  of  Christians  in  our  land. 

The  sixth  feature  of  improvement  is  the  adoption  of  a 
more  regular  and  rigid  system  of  church  government  and 
discipline  in  this  country.  The  union  between  church  and 
state  has  prevented  the  adoption  of  an  independent  and 
thoroughly  scriptural  discipline  in  the  Lutheran,  as  well  as 
in  all  the  other  established  churches  of  Europe.  Kings  and 
.princes  are  not  willing  to  be  disciplined  by  humble  minis- 
ters and  lay  elders.  Accordingly,  the  systems  of  discipline 
in  different  provinces  and  kingdoms  are  different,  and  gene- 
rally very  lax.  In  this  country  our  General  Synod  has 
adopted  and  recommended  a  system,  which,  it  is  believed, 
•contains  all  the  prescriptions  of  the  Saviour  and  his  apostles, 

(1)  Dr.  Plank's  Geschichte  &c,  vol.  vi.  p.  806—809.  See  Appendix, 
No.  H. 

(2)  Butler's  Reminiscence?,  ip.  200. 


PORTRAITURE      OF     LUTHERAN  ISM,  67 

and  all  that  appeared  most  valuable  in  the  systems  of  the 
different  other  churches.  The  government  and  discipline 
of  each  individual  church,  is  essentially  like  that  of  our 
Presbyterian  brethren.  Our  Synods,  also,  in  structure  and 
powers,  most  resemble  their  Presbyteries,  having  fewer  for- 
malities in  their  proceedings,  and  frequently  couching  their 
decisions  in  the  form  of  recommendations.  Our  General 
Synod  is  wholly  an  advisory  body,  resembling  the  conso- 
ciations of  the  Congregational  churches  in  New  England. 
In  addition  to  these  regular  ecclesiastical  bodies,  constitu- 
ting our  system  of  government,  we  having  special  Confer- 
ences, for  the  purpose  of  holding  stated  protracted  meetings. 
These  are  subdivisions  of  Synods,  containing  ordinarily 
from  five  to  ten  ministers  each,  who  are  annually  to  hold 
several  protracted  meetings  within  the  bounds  of  their  dis- 
trict. The  chief  object  of  these  meetings  is,  to  awaken  and 
convert  sinners,  and  to  edify  believers  by  close,  practical 
preaching.  This  feature  mainly  resembles  the  quarterly 
meetings  of  our  Methodist  brethren,  and  presents  to  pious 
and  zealous  ministers,  who  are  thirsting  for  the  salvation  of 
souls,  the  most  direct  opportunity  they  can  desire,  to  glorify 
God,  and  advance  his  spiritual  kingdom.  Yet  all  these 
meetings  are  to  be  conducted  as  the  scriptures  enjoin,  "de- 
cently and  in  order."1  This  system  of  government  is  not 
yet  adopted  by  all  our  Synods ;  yet  its  general  features, 
with  perhaps  a  greater  admixture  of  Congregationalism, 
substantially  pervade  those  Synods  also,  which  have  not  yet 
united  with  the  General  Synod. 

The  last  item  of  improvement  to  which  we  shall  refer, 
is  the  practice  of  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  country,  not 
to  bind  her  ministers  to  the  minutiae  of  any  human  creed. 


(1)  The  views  of  Christian  order  in  worship,  inculcated  hy  our  standards, 
may  be  seen  from  chap.  vii.  sec.  1,  of  our  Formula.  "These  meetings 
(prayer  meetings)  may  be  held  in  the  church,  school-house.,  or  in  private 
houses;  and  their  object  is  the  spiritual  edification  of  the  persons  present; 
but  the  utmost  precaution  must  ever  be  observed,  that  God,  who  is  a  Spirit, 
be  worshipped  in  spirit  and  in  truth ;  that  they  be  characterized  by  that 
solemnity  and  decorum  which  ought  ever  to  attend  divine  worship,  and 
that  no  disorder  be  tolerated,  or  any  thing  that  is  calculated  to  interrupt 
the  devotions  of  those  who  are  convened,  or  prevent  their  giving  the  full- 
est attention  to  him  who  is  engaged  in  leading  the  meeting, — in  short, 
that  according  to  the  injunction  of  the  apostle,  all  things  be  done  '•'de- 
cently and  in  order." 


6B  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHER ANISM. 

The  bible  and  the  belief  that  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the 
bible  are  taught  in  a  manner  substantially  correct  in  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  is  all  that  is  required.  On  the  one  hand, 
we  regard  it  as  certain,  that  if  we  would  be  faithful  to  the 
injunction  of  our  text,  "not  to  receive  any  who  come  to  us 
bringing  another  doctrine,"  an  examination  of  applicants 
for  admission  among  us  is  indispensable.  Such  an  exam- 
ination is  virtually  a  requisition  of  their  ci*eed,  that  we  may 
compare  it  with  our  own.  Now,  whether  the  articles  to 
which  we  require  their  assent  be  few  or  many,  be  written 
or  oral,  they  are  a  creed,  and  obviously  its  reduction  to 
paper,  presents  some  material  facilities  in  the  examination. 
A  written  creed,  therefore,  seems  necessary  to  the  purity  of 
the  church.  On  the  other  hand,  history  informs  us,  that 
for  several  hundred  years  after  the  days  of  the  apostles,  no 
other  creed  was  used  in  the  whole  church  than  that  called 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  because  admitted  by  all  to  contain  the 
principal  doctrines  taught  by  the  apostles.  This  creed  em- 
bodied only  the  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  which  all 
the  so  called  orthodox  denominations  of  the  present  day  do 
actually  believe  ;  and  yet  the  assent  to  these  few  doctrines 
did  for  centuries  after  the  apostolic  age,  secure  admission  to 
any  and  every  part  of  the  Catholic,  that  is,  the  universal 
church  on  earth.  By  what  authority  then  did  the  several 
Protestant  denominations  after  the  Information  adopt  creods 
ten,  and  some  of  them,  a  hundred  times  as  long  as  that  used 
in  the  earlier  ages,  and  require  assent  to  these  interminable 
instruments  as  a  condition  of  admission  to  their  churches? 
The  bible  certainly  confers  no  such  authority.  But  does 
the  experience  of  tliree  centuries  prove  their  influence  to  be 
salutary?  Have  they  not  rather  been  the  occasion  of 
endless  strife  in  all  the  churches  adopting  them?  Have 
they  not  proved  wedges  of  dissension  to  split  asunder  the 
body  of  Christ?  It  is  matter  of  historical  certainty,  that 
the  orthodox  denominations  of  the  present  day  coincide  as 
much  in  doctrinal  views,  as  did  the  Christians  in  the  golden 
age  of  Christianity.  If  they  could  walk  together  in  love, 
and  their  minor  differences  created  no  difficulty  then ;  why 
should  not  Christians  in  the  present  day  unite  in  the  same 
manner,  instead  of  rending  the  body  of  Christ  asunder, 
creating  separate  and  conflicting  interests  among  breth- 
ren in  Christ,  alienation  and  prosecutions  for  minor  differ- 


PORTRAITURE      OF    LUTHERAN  ISM.  69 

ences,  which  would  not  have  been  noticed  in  the  apostolic, 
and  primitive,  and  purest  age  of  the  church.  The  duty  of 
all  parts  of  the  Christian  church  seems  therefore  to  be,  to 
return  to  the  use  of  shorter  doctrinal  creeds  as  tests  of  ec- 
clesiastical, ministerial,  and  sacramental  communion.  This 
noble  course  the  Lutheran  church  has  already  virtually 
taken,  by  requiring  assent  only  to  the  fundamental  doctrines 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  together  with  an  approval  of 
our  principles  of  government  and  worship.  This  course 
cannot  fail  to  promote  brotherly  love,  and  fraternal  appre- 
ciation between  different  denominations,  by  giving  promi- 
nence to  their  actual  unity  in  doctrine,  and  restoring  a 
proper  unity  of  spirit  among  the  disciples  of  Christ.  Hap- 
py, thrice  happy  too  is  the  Lutheran  church,  that  she,  who 
was  first  to  cast  off  the  yoke  of  Roman  superstition  and 
oppression,  should  lead  the  way  in  breaking  the  bonds  of 
Protestant  sectarianism  ;  be  first  in  practically  teaching  the 
world:  that  the  apostolic  injunction  to  "receive  a  brother 
that  is  weak  in  the  faith,  but  not  for  the  purpose  of  doubt- 
ful disputation,"  does  not  mean  to  prosecute  and  expel  him. 
And  happy  are  all  in  every  denomination  who  raise  their 
voice  in  behalf  of  the  lacerated  body  of  Christ,  and  teach 
Christians  to  remember  the  solemn  injunction  of  the  Sa,- 
viour  to  love  one  another ;  and  not  only  to  profess  but  to 
practise  the  principle  of  our  blessed  Lord,  "one  is  our  Mas- 
ter Christ,  and  ye  are  all  brethren." 

Such,  my  brethren,  are  the  features  of  the  Lutheran 
church,  -of  that  church,  to  whose  service  this  chaste  and 
beautiful  edifice  has  been  dedicated.  She  may  be  emphat- 
ically styled  the  church  of  the  Reformation.  She  holds 
the  grand  doctrines  of  Christianity,  with  fewer  appended 
peculiarities  than  most  other  denominations.  With  the  Cal- 
vinist  she  holds  the  graciousness  of  salvation  ;  with  the 
Congregationalist  she  believes  that  Christ  tasted  death  for 
every  man  ;  with  the  Methodist  she  approves  of  regularly 
recurring  protracted  meetings  ;  with  the  Episcopalian  she 
occasionally  employs  a  liturgy  and  forms  of  prayer ;  with 
the  German  Reformed  she  agrees  in  the  instruction  and 
confirmation  of  Catechumens  ;  and  with  all  she  unites  in 
ascribing  all  the  glory  of  our  privileges  on  earth  and  hopes 
in  heaven,  to  that  Lamb  of  God,  that  taketh  away  the  sins 
of  the  world.     Long  may  those  blessed  doctrines  be  taught 


70  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERANISM. 

within  these  sacred  walls !  Long  may  they  be  taught 
throughout  our  favored  land,  purifying  and  elevating  our 
political  and  social  institutions,  providing  for  our  citizens, 
security  of  person  and  property,  and  especially  the  privi- 
lege of  worshiping  God  under  our  own  vine  and  fig  tree, 
making  it  the  land  of  refuge  to  the  virtuous  oppressed  of 
all  nations. 


APPENDIX. 


Note  A.  to  page  49. 

TESTIMONY    OF    CARDINAL    BARONIDS    ON    PAPAL    APOSTOLIC    SUCCESSION. 

""What  was  then  (in  the  tenth  century)  the  aspect  of  the 
holy  Romish  church?  How  extremely  filthy  was  she,  (fce- 
dissima!)  When  the  most  powerful  and  obscene  prostitutes 
governed  at  Rome  ;  and  at  their  pleasure,  the  occupants  of 
the  holy  seat  were  changed,  bishops  were  appointed,  and 
what  is  unutterably  horrible  to  hear,  their  paramours  were 
thrust  into  the  chair  of  St.  Peter  as  false  pontiffs,  who  are 
introduced  into  the  catalogue  of  popes  only  for  the  purpose 
of  making  a  record  of  the  times.  For  who  could  pronounce 
those  to  be  legitimate  Roman  pontiffs,  who  were  thus  in- 
truded by  these  prostitutes,  contrary  to  law  ?  There  is  not 
the  least  mention  made  of  their  having  been  elected  by  the 
clergy,  or  of  their  election  having  been  afterward  sanc- 
tioned by  them.  All  the  canons  were  passed  over  in  silence  ; 
the  decrees  of  the  popes  were  suppressed ;  the  ancient 
usages  and  rules  for  the  election  of  the  popes,  as  well  as 
the  solemn  rites  and  ceremonies  were  altogether  abolished. 
Annalium  ecclesiast.  Tom.  X.  ad  An.  912  num.  8  p.  685. 
apud  Kcecher's  Yertheidigung,  p.  124. 

Note  G.  to  page  49- 

MINISTERIAL   ORDINATION. 

The  subject  of  ministerial  ordination  has  been  involved  in 
some  extraneous  and  unnecessary  difficulty,  partly  by  the 


PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERAIUSM.  71 

incidental  usage  of  language,  partly  by  the  progress  of  super- 
stition in  the  lapse  of  ages,  and  partly  by  the  introduction 
of  diocesan  episcopacy  into  the  Christian  church  in  the  sec- 
ond century.  The  term  ordination  (ordinatio)  has,  in  the 
Christian  church,  generally  acquired  a  technical  character, 
and  is  used  to  designate  the  specific  method  or  formalities 
with  which  it  is  customary  in  any  particular  church  to  in- 
vest a  candidate  or  licentiate  with  the  ministerial  office. 
But  in  the  New  Testament,  no  such  a  technical  word  is 
found.  On  the  contrary,  different  words  are  used  in  the 
several  passages,  and  all  of  them  are  appellative  terms,  sig- 
nifying merely  to  appoint,  to  induct,  or  to  admit;  and  they 
are  also  applied  to  other  objects.  In  some  cases,  the  laying 
on  of  hands  is  mentioned,  as  the  method  by  which  the  indi- 
vidual was  set  apart;  and  it  was  the  superstitious  notion  of 
after  ages,  that  some  mystic  influence  was  imparted  by  "the 
laying  on  of  the  hands,"  which  probably  led  the  Romish 
church  to  exalt  this  rite  into  a  sacrament.  This  error,  the 
Reformers  rejected  and  brought  back  the  ceremony  to  its 
original  simplicity. 

To  ordain,  according  to  the  New  Testament,  merely  sig- 
nifies to  induct  into  the  sacred  office.  It  implies  that  some 
care  was  exercised,  and  not  every  one  indiscriminately  al- 
lowed to  perform  the  duties  of  the  sacred  office  ;  but  it  does 
not  in  the  least  imply  that  any  particular  influence  or  power 
is  transmitted  by  lineal  succession  from  the  apostles. 

As  to  the  persons  who  are  to  perform  this  rite,  that  is, 
are  to  induct  others  into  the  sacred  office,  we  find  that  Paul 
and  Barnabas,  in  traveling  through  Antioch  and  other 
places,  "chose  (ordained)  elders  for  them."  Paul  and  Bar- 
nabas had  been  set  apart  for  the  missionary  work  by  the 
laying  on  of  the  hands,  not  of  a  diocesan  bishop,  but  of 
certain  prophets  and  teachers;  namely,  Simeon,  Lucius,  and 
Manaen.  Timothy  was  inducted  (ordained)  by  the  laying 
on  of  the  hands,  not  of  a  bishop  of  a  diocese,  "but  of  the 
ministry ;  that  is,  eldership,  or,  to  retain  the  Greek  word, 
the  presbytery."  In  several  cases,  also,  individual  minis- 
ters, such  as  Timothy  and  Titus,  were  directed  to  induct 
(ordain)  others. 

The  principal  passages  involved  in  the  subject  of  ordina- 
tion, are  the  following,  from  which  the  reader  may  learn 
the  scripture  aspect  of  this  rite. 


72  PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHERANISM. 

Acts  xiv.  23.  And  when  they  (Paul  and  Barnabas)  had 
ordained  (^ci^orov^a'ayTsa',  had  chosen;  from  yji?,  hand,  and 
tsjvw,  to  stretch  forth,  voting  by  uplifted  hand;  De  Wette, 
erwahlet.  See  2  Cor.  viii.  19,  where  the  same  word  is  ren- 
dered ''chosen"  in  our  common  version)  elders  for  them  in 
every  church,  and  had  prayed  with  fasting,  they  com- 
mended them  to  the  Lord,  on  whom  they  believed. 

1  Tim.  iv.  14.  Neglect  not  the  gift  that  is  in  thee,  which 
was  given  thee  by  prophecy  with  the  laying  on  of  the 
hands  of  the  presbytery,  (vts<ffivrr\pis,  the  eldership,  that 
is,  of  the  ministers,  not  of  a  diocesan  bishop.) 

1  Tim.  v.  22.  Lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man,  (x^faC 

Acts  xiii.  3.  And  when  they  (that  is,  not  bishops,  but 
"certain  prophets  and  teachers,  as  Barnabas,  and  Simeon, 
and  Lucius,  and  Manaen,  v.  1 )  had  fasted  and  prayed  and 
laid  their  hands  on  them,  (JTritL-v-jcr  ~atf  Xs^atf,)  they  sent 
them  away. 

Acts  vi.  6.  Whom  (namely,  the  seven  deacons  whom  the 
"multitude  of  the  disciples"  had  chosen,  v.  4,  5)  they  set 
before  the  apostles ;  and  when  they  had  prayed,  they  laid 
their  hands  on  them,  (sirifcvixav  auroltf  rout  ylioat.) 

The  above  are  all  the  actual  ordinations  recorded  in  the 
New  Testament.  The  following  are  the  other  passages  in 
which  the  word  "ordain"  occurs  in  our  English  New  Tes- 
tament in  reference  to  the  church.  We  add  the  Greek  to 
show  how  various  the  words  are  in  the  original. 

Mark  iii.  14.  Jesus  ordained  (s^oiri-rs,  made,  appointed; 
Stoltz,  bestimmte ;  De  Wette,  bestellete)  twelve  to  be  with 
him,  &c. 

1  Cor.  vii.  17.  So  ordain  I  (5iara<;<fo<j.cu,  direct;  Schleus- 
ner  verordne)  in  all  the  churches. 

1  Tim.  ii.  7.  For  this  purpose  (says  Paul)  I  am  ordained 
(rz^r;v,  appointed;  Stoltz,  gesetzet;  De  Wette,  bestellet)  a 
preacher,  (*-*]£ui;.) 

Heb.  v.  1.  For  every  high  priest  is  ordained  for  men, 
<fec,  (xo^KTaraj,  placed,  appointed;  Stoltz,  eingesetzt;  De 
Wette,  bestellet.) 

Heb.  vi\i.  3.  For  every  high  priest  is  ordained,  (xahiarat, 
placed,  appointed;  Stoltz,  eingesetzt ;  De  Wette,  bestellet.) 

Tit.  i,  5.  For  this  end  left  I  thee  in  Crete,  (says  Paul  to 
Titus,)  that  thou  shouldst  ordain  elders  (xaro^T^^l  cr^stf* 


PORTRAITURE     O  F    LU  T  H  E  E  A  XI  S  M  .  73 

fivrsgxtf,  Stoltz,  einsetzest;  De  Wette,  anstelletest, )  as  I 
appointed  (§tsra%ajp.y\v  <?<*,  directed;  Stoltz,  geboten ;  De 
Wette,  geboten)  thee. 

From  these  passages,  it  is  evident,  that  the  scriptures 
contain  not  a  word  about  the  transmission  of  any  mystic,  or 
sacred  influence  or  power,  by  succession  from  the  apostles. 
And  it  is  also  evident,  that  in  not  one  of  the  three  examples 
of  ordination  or  induction,  mentioned  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, was  that  rite  performed  by  one  man,  and  he  a  dio- 
cesan bishop ;  but  always  by  several  persons,  in  the  one 
case,  by  Paul  and  Barnabas,  in  another,  by  "certain  pro- 
phets and  teachers,  Barnabas,  Simeon,  Lucius  and  Manaen ; 
and  in  the  third,  by  the  eldership,  that  is,  the  ministry. 
Yet,  as  the  apostle  Paul  directed  Timothy  and  Titus  to  ad- 
mit men  to  this  office,  we  regard  the  ordination  of  one 
minister  as  valid,  whether  he  be  called  bishop,  or  minister, 
or  elder. 

Note  B.  to  page  5&. 

LUTHERAN   CHURCH   IN   SWEDEN.  NORWAY.   AND    FINLAND,. 

A  most  interesting,  satisfactory  and  authentic  work  on 
the  state  of  the  Lutheran  church  in  Sweden,  was  published 
in  1821-1822,  by  Dr.  Frederick  William  Von  Shubert,  pro- 
fessor of  Theology  in  the  university  at  Greifswald.  From- 
this  work,  it  appears  that  Sweden  is  at  present  divided  into 
twelve  dioceses  or  districts,  as  follows ; 

1.  The  diocese  of  Upsala,  in  which  the  archbishop  re- 
sides. This  diocese  contains  166  pastoral  districts,  and  244 
churches. 

2.  The    diocese   of   Lmkqping,  embracing   147  pastoral- 
districts,  and  216  churches. 

3.  The  diocese  of  Skara,  includes  113  pastoral  districts, 
and  360  churches. 

4.  Diocese  of  Strengnas,  contains  102  pastoral  districts, 
and  170  churches. 

5.  Diocese  of  Westeras,  has  84  pastoral  districts,  and  120. 
churches. 

6.  Diocese  of  Wexio,  includes  98  pastoral  districts,  and 
185  churches. 

7.  Diocese  of  Lunds,  has  223  pastoral  districts,  and  431 
churches. 


74  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERANISM. 

8.  Diocese  of  Goelheburg,  includes  102  pastoral  districts, 
and  262  churches. 

9.  Diocese  of  Salmar,  contains  45  pastoral  districts,  and 
58  churches. 

10.  Diocese  of  Carlstad,  embraces  40  pastoral  districts, 
and  129  churches. 

11.  Diocese  of  Hernosand,  includes  63  pastoral  districts, 
and  162  churches. 

12.  Diocese  of  Wisby,  contains  43  pastoral  districts,  and 
92  churches. 

FINLAND 

Embraces  two  dioceses,  viz:  that  of  Abo,  containing  127 
pastoral  districts,  and  that  of  Borgo,  including  83  pastoral 
districts,  including  a  German  one  in  Wiborg. 

NORWAY 

Is  divided  into  four  districts  or  dioceses,  viz : 

1.  Diocese  of  Ohrutiania  or  Oggerthus. 

2.  Diocese  of  Christians  and. 

3.  Diocese  of  Bergen. 

4.  Diocese  of  Drontheim. 

Note  C.  to  page  58. 
Of  the  Theologians  and  Theological  Literature  of  the  Lu- 
theran church  in  Europe,  our  space  will  not  allow  us  to 
attempt  even  an  outline.  A  volume  would  be  requisite  for 
this  purpose.  A  catalogue  of  the  publications  by  Lutheran 
divines  in  this  country,  may,  however,  not  be  uninteresting 
to  many  of  our  readers.  All  these  works,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  a  few,  are  contained  in  the  writer's  library.  Of  that 
few,  the  following  notices  are  given  from  memory. 

LIST  OF  PUBLICATIONS   BY  LUTHERAN  MINIS- 
TERS IN  THE  UNITED  STATES.* 
The  names  are  arranged  chronologically,  as  far  as  known  to  the  writer. 

Henry  Melchior  Muhlenberg,  D.  D.,  principal    and 
amhor  of  the  Hallische   Nachrichten,  1   vol.  4to.,  pp.    1580, 

Halle,  1747-1763. 

*For  a  select  list  of  the  principal  Lutheran  Theologians  and  theological 
productions  of  Europe,  sec  the  author's  Popular  Theology.  5  ed..  Appendix. 

The  above  list,  first  prepared  by  us  for  this  work,  in  1840,  has  been 
transferred  to  the  Lutheran  Almanac  for  1851,  with  some  later  additions, 
which,  in  turn,  we  also  adopt,  with  other  additions. 


PORTRAITURE      OF    LUTHERANISM.  75 

John  Frederick  Handschuii,  next  principal    and 
author  of  Hallische  Nachrichten,  1747-1763. 

Just.  H.  Helmuth,  D.  D.,  Pastor  in  Philadelphia: 
Taufe  und  Keilige  Schrift,  Germantown,  1793,  Svo.,  pp.  336. 
Unterhartungen  mit  Gott,  8vo.,  pp.  180,  (anonymous.) 
Geistliche  Lieder,  12mo.,  pp.  200. 
Numerous  pious  works  for  children. 

John   C.  Kunze,   D.  D.,   member  of  Am.  Philosophical 
Society,  Pastor,  N.  Y.: 
Ein  Wort  fur  den  Verstand  und  das  Herz,  Svo. ,  pp.  243,  Phila., 

1781. 
English  Hymn  Book — much  of  it  tranlasted  from  the  German. 
History  of  the  Christian  Religion,  and  History  of  the  Lutheran 

Church. 
Geistliche  Gedichte,  in  1  vol.  12mo.,  pp.  200. 
New  Method  of  calculating  the   great  Eclipse   of  June  16th, 

1806. 

Gotthilf  Hen.  Muhlenberg,  D.  D.,  Pastor  in  Lancaster: 
Rebe  bei  der  Einweihung  des  Franklin  Collegiums,  Lancaster, 

1788. 
Catalogus  Plantarum,  &c. 
Flora  Lancastriensis,  8vo. 

English  and  German  Lexicon  and  Grammar,  2  vols.  8vo. 
Grasses  of  Pennsylvania. 

Rev.  Jacob  Goering,  Pastor  in  York,  Pa.: 
Besiegter  Wiedertaufer,  1  vol.  8vo.,  pp.  92,  1783,  (anon.) 
Answer  to  a  Methodist's  Remonstrance,  York,  (anon.) 
Der  Verkappte  Priester  Aaron,  (uber   die  Siebentager,)  about 

1790. 

Rev.  F.  Y.  Melsheimer,  Senior  Pastor,  Hanover,  Pa.: 

Wahrheit  der  Christlichen  Religion,  mit  Beantwortung  Deisti- 
scher  Einwurfe,  1  vol.  Svo. 

Gesprache  zwischen  einem  Protestanten  and  Romischen  Pries- 
ter, Hanover,  1797,  1  vol.  18mo.,  pp.  122. 

Fred.  H.  Quitman,  D.  D.,  Pastor  at  Rheinbeck,  K  Y.: 
Sermons  on  the  Reformation,  Hudson,  1817. 
Evangelical  Catechism,  Hudson,  1814. 
Hymn  Book  of  the  Synod  of  New  York  edit.,  1817. 
Treatise  on  Magic. 

J.  D.  Kurtz,  D.D.,  Pastor,  Baltimore: 
Gemeinschaftliches  Gesangbuch,  editor,  Bait.,  1817. 


76  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHER  AN  ISM. 

Various  articles  in  the  "  Evangelische  Magazin." 

Paulus  Henkle,  Newmarket,  Va.: 
Sammlung  Geistreicher  Lieder,  Newmarket. 
Also,  several  small  works  for  children. 

J.  G.  Schmucker,  D.D.,  Pastor,  York,  Pa.: 
Prophetic  History  of  the  Christian  Religion,  or  Explanation  of 

Revelation  of  St.  John,  2  vols.  8vo.,  Bait.,  1817. 
Vornehmste  Weissagungen  der  HeSigen  Schrift,  Hagerstown, 

1807,  1  vol.  12mo. 
Wachterstimme  an  Zion's  Kinder,  Gettysburg,  18-38, 1  vol.  12mo. 

pp.  233. 
Reformations  Geschichte  zur  Jubelfeier  der  Reformation,  York, 

1817,  pp.  32. 
Elegie  zum  Andenken  an  Goering. 
Schwarmergeist  unserer  Tage.  entlarvt,  zur  Warming  erweckter 

Seelen,  York,  1827,  pp.  52. 
Lieder  Anhang,  zum  Evang.  Gesangbuch  der  General  Synode, 

1833. 
Erhlarung  der  offenbung  Johannis.  Bait.,  1  vol.  8vo.,  pp.  347. 

J.  George  Lochman,  D.  D.,  Pastor,  Harrisburg,  Pa.: 
History,  Doctrine  and  Discipline  of  the  Lutheran  church,  1  vol. 

12mo.,  pp.  165,  Harrisburg,  1818. 
Evangelical  Catechism,  Harrisburg,  1822,  pp.  56. 
Introductory  Sermon,  Harrisburg. 
Valedictory  Sermon,  Lebanon,  1815. 
Hinterlassene  Predigten,  1828,  1  vol.  Svo.,  pp.  334. 

Dr.  Endress  : 

Christi  Regiment  mit  weltlicher  Monarchie   und  Aristocratie 

unvereinbar,  12mo.,  1791. 
Also,  posthumous  Sermons,  published  in  Lutheran  Preacher  and 

Pulpit. 

Rev.  Flour,  "Wythe  County,  Va.: 
Sermons,  (posthumous.) 

Rev.  G.  Shober,  Pastor,  Salem,  N.  C: 

History  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation  and  Lutheran  Church, 

Baltimore,  1818,  12mo.,  pp.  213. 
Scenes  in  the  World  of  Spirits,  translated  from  the  German  of 

Stilling;  Review,  &c,  8vo. 

E.  L.  Hazelius,  D.D.,  Prof,  in  Tlieol.  Seminary,  Lex- 
ington, S.  C: 
Life  of  Luther,  New  York,  1813,  12mo..  pp.  169. 


P-ORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHER  AN  ISM.  77 

Life  of  Stilling,  from  the  German,  Gettysburg,  1831,  pp.  415. 

Augsburg  Confession,  with  Annotations. 

Evangelisches  Magazin,  edit.  1831. 

Materials  for  Catechisation  on  Passages  of  Scripture,  1823,  pp. 

76. 
Church  History,  Bait,  vol.  1,  1842,  pp.  277. 
History  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  America,  Zanesville,  Ohio, 

1845,  1  vol.  12mo.,  pp.  300. 
Inaugural  Address,  Lexington,  S.  Car.,  1834. 

Augustus  Wackerhagen,  D.D.,  Pastor,  Clermont,  New- 
York: 
Inbegriff  der  Glaubens  und  Sittenlehre,  Philadelphia,  1804,  1 

vol.  12mo.,  pp.  299. 

F.  D.  Sciiaeffer,  Sr.,  D.  D.,  Pastor,  Phil'a.: 
Antwort  auf  eine  Vertheidigung  der  Methodisten,  Germantown, 
1806. 

Johx  Bachman,  D.D.,  Charleston,  S.  C: 
The  Quadrupeds  of  North  America,  3  vols. 
The  Doctrine  of  the  Unity  of  the  Human  Race  examined  on 

the  Principles  of  Science. 
The  Design  and  Duties  of  the  Christian  Ministry,  a  Sermon, 

preached  before  General  Synod,  N.  Y.,  1848,  pp.  23. 
A  Sermon  on  the   Doctrines  and  Discipline  of  the  Lutheran 

Church. 
Funeral  Discourse  on  the  Death  of  Rev.  John  G.  Swartz. 
Address  before   the  Washington  Total  Abstinence -Society  of 

Charleston. 
An   Inquiry  into  the   Nature   and  Benefits  of  an  Agricultural 

Survey. 
An  Address  before  the  Horticultural  Society  of  Charleston. 
Catalogue  of  Phaenogamous  Plants  and  Ferns  growing  in  the 

vicinity  of  Charleston. 

F.  C.  Schaeffer,  D.D.,  Pastor,  New  York: 

German  Correspondent,  1  vol.,  8vo. 

Sermon   at  Centurial  Jubilee   of  Reformation,  N.  York,  1817, 

pp.  56. 
Parables  and  Parabolic  Sayings,  1  vol.  18mo. 

Rev.  Dr.  Ernst,  Lebanon,  Pa.: 
Sermon  on  the  Death  of  Washington. 

B.  Kurtz,  D.D.,  Editor  Lutheran  Observer: 
First  Principles  of  Religion  for  Children,  Hagerstow  a,  1821, 

1a 


78  PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHER  A  NISM, 

Sermon  on  Sabbath  Schools. 

Faith,  Hope,  Charity,  Hagerstown,  1823. 

Pastoral  Address  during  his  tour  through  Europe. 

A  door  opened  of  the  Lord,  Introductory  Sermon,  Chambers- 
burg,  Pa.,  14th  August,  1831. 

Ministerial  Appeal,  a  Valedictory  Sermon,  Hagerstown,  Md., 
4th  Sept.,  1831. 

Infant  Baptism  and  Affusion,  with  Essays  on  related  subjects, 
1840,  1  vol.  8vo.,  Bait,  pp.  370. 

Address  on  Temperance,  1824. 

Why  are  you  a  Lutheran]   1843,  1  vol.  12mo.,  pp.  227. 

D.  F.  Schaeffer,  D.D.,  Pastor,  Frederick,  Maryland: 
Lutheran  Intelligencer,  editor,  4  vols.  8vo.,  1826-1830. 

J.  Herbst,  Pastor,  Gettysburg : 
Evangelisches  Magazin,  editor,  1830. 
Inaugural  Address  of  Dr.  Schmucker,  translated  into  German, 

1826. 

Rev.  Dr.  Miller,  Prof.  Hartwick  Seminary.: 
On  the  Fundamental  Principle  of  the  Reformation,  1831. 
Also,  Sermons  in  the  Lutheran  Preacher,  1834. 
Sermon  on  Doctrines  and  Discipline  of  the  Ev.  Luth.  Church, 

Nov.  12,  1837. 
Sermon  on  the  semi-centennial  celebration  of  N.  York  Synod, 

1845,  pp.  25. 

G.  A.  Lintner,  D.  D.,  Pastor,  Schoharie,  N.  York: 
Lutheran  Magazine,  co-editor,  2  vols.,  l827-'28. 
Liturgy,  published  by  the  General  Synod,  1832. 
Sermon  at  the  Installation  of  Rev.  Lawyer,  1828. 
Augsburg  Confession,  with  Notes,  1837. 
Sermon  on  Truth  as  the  Bond  of  Union,  1841 ,  pp.  19. 

C.  R.  Demme,  D.D.,  Pastor,  Philadelphia: 
Die  Werke   des  Flavins  Josephus,  in  berichtigter  Ubersetzung, 

und  mit  Anmerkungen,  Phil'a.,  1839,  1  vol.  4to. 
'•'Die  Letzte    Ehre,"   eine   Leichenrede,   beim   absterben   des 

Hochw.     J.  H.  C.  Helmuth,  Phil'a.,  1825. 
Synodal  Predigt,  1839. 

C.  P.  Krauth,  D.D.,  Prof,  at  Theo.  Sem.,  Gettysburg: 
Lutheran  Intelligencer,  co-editor,  1826. 
Lutheran  Sunday  School  Hymn  Book,  editor,  Philadelphia. 
Oration  on  the  advantages  of  a  knowledge  of  the  German  Ian- 


PORTRAITURE     OF     LUTHERAX1SM.  79 

guage,  before  the   Students  of  Theological  Seminary,  Get- 
tysburg, 1832,  published  by  request. 
Evangelical  Review,  editor,  1850. 

S.   S.   Schmucker,  D.  D.,    Prof.  Theological  Seminary, 
Gettysburg : 

Biblical  Theology  of  Storr  and  Flatt,  translated  from  the  Ger- 
man, Andover,  1826,  2  vols. 

Elements  of  Popular  Theology,  Andover,  1834,  1  vol.  8vo. 

Kurtzgefasste  Geschichte  der  Christlichen  Kirche,  auf  der 
Grundlage  des  Busch'en  Werks,  Gettysburg,  1S34,  1  vol. 
8vo.,  pp.  352. 

Evangelisches  Magazin,  editor,  1830. 

Hymn  Book  of  General  Synod,  compiler,  1828. 

Formula  of  Gov.  and  Discipline  for  Congregations  and  Synods, 
published  by  the  General  Synod,  1823-1829. 

Inaugural  Address,  Gettysburg,  1826. 

Discourse  in  commemoration  of  the  Reformation,  preached  be- 
fore Synod,  1837,  pp.  142,  18mo. 

Fraternal  Appeal  to  the  American  Churches  on  Christian 
Union,  Andover,  1838,  1  vol.  12mo.,  pp.  149. 

Discourse  delivered  at  the  request  of  the  Board  of  Managers  of 
Amer.  Sunday  School  Union,  Philadelphia,  1839. 

Christian  Temple,  a  Synodical  discourse,  1824. 

Plea  for  the  Sabbath  School  System,  1830. 

Oration  on  Anniversary  of  Washington's  Birth  day,  1839. 

Psychology,  or  Elements  of  Mental  Philosophy,  New  York, 
1842,  1  vol.  8vo.,  pp.  329. 

Discourse  on  Capital  Punishment,  Phil'a.,  1845. 

Portraiture  of  Lutheranism,  1840,  pp.  89. 

Retrospect  of  Lutheranism,  1840. 

Patriarchs  of  American  Lutheranism,  1845. 

Christian  Pulpit,  1846. 

Papal  Hierarchy,  1845. 

Church  Development  on  apostolic  principles,  1850. 

Rev.  Waltz,  Pastor,  Hamburg,  Pa.: 
Erklarung  des  Calenders,  nebst  Unterricht  uber  die  Himmels- 
korper,  Reading,  1830,  1  vol.  8vo.,  pp.  315. 

Rev.  H.  ST.  Pohlman,  D.D.,  Albany,  N.  Y.: 

A  Catechism. 

Address  on  Temperance. 

Rev.  H.  W.  Scriba,  Pastor,  Strasburg,  Pa.: 
Anfangsgrunde   des   Christenthums   fur  die  Jugend,  aus  dem. 


80  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHE RAX ISM. 

Franzosischen  ubersetzt,  Chambersburg,  1834,  1  vol.  8vo., 
pp.  143. 

Rev.  D.  Henkel,  Pastor,  Lincoln,  N.  C: 
On  Regeneration,  Salisbury,  1822,  pp.  48. 

Rev.  Probst  : 
Wiedervereinigung  der  Lutheraner  und  Reformirten,  Allentown, 

1826,  1  vol.  12mo.,  pp.  172. 

Rev.  C.  Henkle,  Pastor,  Somerset,  Ohio : 
On  the  Reformation,  a  Synodical  discourse,  1838. 
Ueber  die  Kinderzucht,  1822. 

Rev.  A.  H.  Lochman,  York,  Pa.: 
Rosa  of  Lindenwald — translated. 

Rev.  S.  Eichelberger,  A.  M.,  Winchester : 
Lutheran  Preacher,  editor,  2  vols.  8vo.,  1833,  Winchester. 
Sermons  on  National  Blessings  and  Obligations,  1830. 

Rev.  J.  G.  Morris,  D.D.,  Pastor,  Baltimore: 

Catechumen's  and  Communicant's  Companion,  Baltimore,  1831, 
1  vol.  12mo.,  pp.  250. 

Catechetical  Exercises  on  Luther's  Catechism,  altered  from  the 
German,  Baltimore,  1832,  18mo.,  pp.  72. 

Henry  and  Antonio  of  Dr.  Brettschneider,  translated  from  the 
German.  1824.  1  vol.  8vo.,  pp.  254. 

Lutheran  Observer,  editor,  2  vols.,  1831-1832. 

Von  Leonard's  Lectures  on  Geology,  translated  from  the  Ger- 
man, Baltimore,  1839,  1  vol.  12mo. 

Popular  Exposition  of  the  Gospels,  for  families,  Bible  classes, 
and  Sunday  schools,  2  vols.,  Bait.,  1840. 

Address  on  the  Study  of  Natural  History,  1841. 

Sermon  on  the  Reformation. 

Address  at  the  Dedication  of  Linnasan  Hall. 

Luther's  Catechism  Illustrated. 

Address  at  the  Dedication  of  Mt.  Olivet  Cemetery,  Bait. 

Rev.  J.  N.  Hoffman,  Pastor,  Chambersburg  : 

Arndt's  True  Christianity,  translated  from  the  German,  1  vol. 
8vo.,  Chambersburg,  1834. 

Evangelical  Hymns,  original  and  selected,  for  families  and  pri- 
vate circles,  1  vol.  18mo.,  1833. 

A  collection  of  Texts,  &c.  &c.  publisher. 

Rev.  T.  Lape  : 
Theological  Sketch  Book,  3  vols. 


PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHE  RANIS  M.  81 

Mourners  Comforted,  24mo.,  pp.  173,  N.  York. 
On  Infant  Baptism,  Bait.,  1843,  pp.  93,  18mo. 

W.  M.  Reynolds,  D.  D.,  Pres.  Capital  University,   Co- 
lumbus, 0. 

Monthly  Magazine  of  Religion  and  Literature,  editor,  Gettys- 
burg, 1840,  1  vol.  Svo. 
Discourse  on  the  Swedish  Churches. 
Inaugural  Address,  1850. 
Evangelical  Review,  editor,  1849. 

Rev.  H.  L.  Baugher,  D.  D.,  President  of  Pennsylva- 
nia College,  Gettysburg: 
Sermon  on  the  Providence  of  God,  1831. 
Also,  Sermons  in  the  Lutheran  Preacher,  1834. 

Rev.  P.  Rizer,  Dayton,  Ohio, 
Sermon  in  behalf  of  Foreign  Missions,  1850,  "pp.  19. 

H.  J.  Smith,  D.D.,  Prof,  of  German  Lit.,  Columbia"  Col- 
lege, Xew  York : 

y  of  Education,  1  vol.  12mo.,  1839. 
Inaugural  Address,  1848. 
Discourse  on  Sabbath  Schools. 
Address  before  the  Phrenakosmian  Society,  Gettysburg,  1843. 

Rev.  J.  C.  Hope,  S.  C: 
On  Modern  Universalism,  Columbia,  S.  C,  1841,  pp.  60. 
Sermon  on  the  Missionary  Cause,  Lexington,  S.  C,  1844,  pp.  24. 

Rev.  L.  Sternberg  : 
Sermon  on  the  Death  of  Gen.  Jackson. 

Rev.  R.  Weiser,  Pastor,  Wootlsboro',  Md.: 
On  Revivals  of  Religion,  1840. 
Life  of  Luther,  1  vol.  8vo.,  pp.  443,  Bait.,  1849. 
Mourners  Bench,  Bedford,  1844,  pp.  32. 

Rev.  C.  A.  Smith,  Rhinebeck,  K  Y.: 

Illustrations  of  Faith,  1850,  1  vol.  12mo.,  pp.  160. 

Sermons  on  Missions. 

Parables  translated  from  the  German  of   Krummacher,  New 

York,  1833. 
Catechumen's  Guide,  1  vol.  12mo. 

Popular  Exposition  of  the  Gospels,  &c,  2  vols.,  Bait.,  1840. 
Lutheran  Pulpit,  2  vols.,  edition,  183S-'39. 


82  PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHERANISM. 

Rev.  S.  W.  Harkey,  Pastor,  Frederick,  Md.: 

Lutheran  Sunday  School  Question  Book,  Fredericktown,  1838. 

Address  before  Phrenakosmian  Society  of  Pennsylvania  Col- 
lege, Gettysburg,  1837. 

The  Visitor,  editor,  Frederick,  1840. 

Translation  of  Starke's  Prayer  Book,  1  vol.  8vo.,  1844. 

The  Churche's  Best  State,  1  vol.  12mo. 

Sermon  on  the  Death  of  Gen.  Harrison. 

Sermon  on  National  Thanksgiving,  1842. 

Prisons  for  Women,  Frederick,  1847,  pp.  32. 

Rev.  J.  H.  Bernheim,  Pastor,  Venango,  Pa.: 
Ueber  das  Heilige  Abendmahl,  1834,  1  vol.  12mo. 

Gottlieb  Yeager,  Hamburg,  Pa.: 
Leben  des  Andreas  Jackson  aus  dem  Englishen  Uebersetzt. 

Rev.  Schmidt,  Pastor,  Pittsburg,  Pa.: 
Evangelische  Kirchenzeitung,  editor,  2  vols.,  1839-'40. 

Rev.  Solomon  Ritz,  Xenia,  0.: 
Scriptural  Dialogue  on  Protracted  Meetings,  Revivals,  Prayer 

Meetings,  &c,  Canton,  O.,  1844,  pp..  35. 

Rev.  S.  Sprecher,  D.  D.,  President  Wittenberg  College, 
Springfield,  Ohio: 
Inaugural  Address,  1849,  pp.  24. 

Rev.  C.  C.  Guenther,  New  Franklin,  0.: 
Dialogue  on  Baptism,  1  vol.  12mo.,  1848. 

C.  F.  Schaeffer,  D.  D.,  Lower  Red  Hook,  K  York: 
Discourse  on  the  Reformation  of  Luther,  1837. 

Rev.  C.  Martin,  M.  D.: 
Lecture  on  the  Deleterious  Effect  of  Tobacco,  1836. 

Rev.  S.  A.  Mealy,  Pastor,  Philadelphia: 
On  the  Death  of  Rev.  Bergman,  1832. 
Also,  Sermons  in  Lutheran  Preacher,  1834. 

Rev.  D.  Kohler,  Kutztown,  Pa.: 
Biblische  4ti  Juli  Predigt,  1847. 

Rev.  E.  Keller,  D.D.: 
Address  before  the  Alumni  of  the  Theological  Seminary  a* 

Gettysburg,  1844. 
Inaugural  Address,  Springfield,  Ohio. 


PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTHERANISM.  83 

Rev.  C.  TV.  Schaeffer,  Germantown : 
Sermon  on  History  of  Church  in  Harrisburg. 

Rev.  G.  Dieiil,  Easton,  Pa.: 
Thanksgiving  Sermon,  Easton. 

Rev.  J.  F.  Smith,  A.M.: 
Sermon  on  the  Silent  Influence  of  the  Bible,  1850,  pp.  26. 
Hints  to  Church  Members,  Winchester,  Va.,  1845. 
Sermon  before  the  Foreign  Missionary  Society  of  the  Lutheran 

Church,  1845,  pp.  50. 
Address  on  Pulpit  Eloquence,  184S,  pp.  35. 

Rev.  D.  F.  Bittle,  A.M.,  Pastor,  Middletown,  Md.: 
Remarks  on  New  Measures,  1839. 

Rev.  C.  A.  Hat,  Hamsburo-,  Pa.: 
Essay  on  Lexicography,  1845. 

Rev.  C.  P.  Krauth,  A.M.,  Winchester,  Va.: 
The  Transfiguration,  1850. 
"  The  Pastoral  Office,  a  Farewell  Discourse,"  Bait.,  1845. 

Rev.  W.  A.  Passavant,  Pittsburg  : 

Address  before  the  Franklin  Literary  Society  of  Jefferson  Col- 
lege. 

Funeral  Sermon  on  the  Death  of  Rev.  M.  J4  Steck,  pp.  29, 
184S. 

Missionary,  editor,  3  vols.,  1848-51. 

Rev.  S.  M.  Schmucker,  Germantown,  Pa.: 

Modern  Infidelity  Refuted,  1  vol.  8vo.,  pp.  480. 
Rev.  Jos.  A.  Seiss,  Cumberland,  Md.: 

Thanksgiving  Discourse,  1847. 

Lectures  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  1  vol.  8vo.,  1846. 

Address  before  the  Excelsior  and  Philosophian  Societies  of  Wit- 
tenberg College. 

Address  on  Intemperance,  1845. 

Rev.  F.  Wynekex,  St.  Louis  : 
Spruch  Buchlein. 

Rev.  J.  Winecoff  : 
On  Modern  Dancing. 

Rev.  C  A.  Brandt,  Manayunk,  Pa.: 
Rede  bei  der  Grundsteinlegung  d.  Luth.  Kirche,  zu  Manayunk. 


84  PORTRAITURE     OF    LUTH  E  R  AN  IS  M. 

Rev.  J.  Albach  : 
Translation  of  Meurer's  Life  of  Luther. 
Rev.  H.  L.  Dox  : 

Sermon  on  the  True  Foundation. 

The  following  ministers  have  contributed  sermons  to  the 
Lutheran  Preacher  : 

D.  F.  Schaeffeiv  D.  D.,  Rev.  Dr.  Miller.  Rev.  Dr.  Hazelius, 
Rev.  S.  A.  Mealy,  Dr.  G.  A.  Lintner,  Dr.  Baugher,  W.  D.  Stro- 
bel,  D.  D.,  Rev.  T.  Lape,  Rev.  L.  Eichelberger,  Rev.  F.  W. 
Geissenhainer,  Jr.,  Rev.  J.  Medtart,  Rev.  C.  Weyl,  C.  P. 
Schaeffer,  D.  D.,  Rev.  J.  C.  Hope,  J.  G.  Schmucker,  D.  D. 

Contributors  to  the  Lutheran  Pulpit : 

Rev.  C.  A.  Smith,  editor,  Rev.  D.  Eyster,  Rev.  T.  Lape, 
Rev.  Edward  Mover,  F.  W.  Geissenhainer,  Jr.,  H.  J.  Smith, 
D.  D.,  Rev.  Dr.  Miller,  Rev.  R.  Weiser,  Rev.  W.  D.  Strobel, 
Rev.  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth,  Rev.  Dr.  A.  Wackerhagen,  Rev.  J. 
Berger,  Rev.  S.  A.  Mealy,  Rev.  Dr.  G.  A.  Lintner,  Rev.  L. 
Eichelberger,  Rev.  C.  B.  Thuemmel. 

Note  E.  to  page  64. 

calvin's  opinion  of  confession  as  formerly  practised  by  some  trotestants. 

Having  no  copy  of  the  Translation  of  the  Institutes  at 
hand,  we  render  the  following  extract  from  the  original 
Latin,  (Tholuck's  edition,  Pt.  1,  p.  411,  412,)  that  our  read- 
ers may  have  access  to  the  opinion  of  this  truly  great  and 
illustrious  divine.  "  The  Scriptures,  moreover,  (says  Cal- 
vin,) approve  of  two  kinds  of  private  confession.  The  one, 
which  is  made  for  our  own  benefit,  is  referred  to  by  James, 
(James  v.  16,)  in  the  declaration  that  we  should  "  confess 
our  sins  one  to  another  ;  for  he  supposes  that  by  disclosing 
our  infirmities  one  to  another,  we  shall  be  profited  by  mu- 
tual advice  and  consolation.  The  other  is  that,  which  is  to 
be  performed  for  the  sake  of  our  neighbor,  for  the  purpose 
of  appeasing  him,  and  reconciling  him  to  us,  if  he  has  in 
any  way  been  injured  by  our  fault.  In  the  former  kind  of 
confession,  although  St.  James,  by  not  specifying  any  one, 
into  whose  bosom  wre  should  unburden  ourselves,  has  left 
us  unrestricted  choice  to  make  our  confession  to  any  one  in 
the  whole  church,  whom  we  regard  as  most  suitable  ;  yet, 
as  ministers  must  be  considered  much  more  appropriate 
than  others,  we  ought  especially  to  select  them.     I  affirm, 


PORTRAITURE    OF    LU  T  HE  R  A  N  1/S  M  .  85 

that  they  are  better  adapted  to  this  work  than  others,  be- 
cause, by  their  very  call  to  the  ministry,  they  are  pointed 
out  to  us  by  God  as  the  persons,  by  whom  we  are  to  be 
taught  how  to  correct  and  subdue  our  sins,  that  we  may 
derive  comfort  from  the  confident  expectation  of  pardon." — 
"Therefore,  every  believer  should  remember,  that,  if  he 
be  so  troubled  in  mind,  and  distressed  by  a  sense  of  his 
sins,  that  he  cannot  extricate  himself  without  the  aid  of 
others,  it  is  his  duty  not  to  neglect  the  remedy,  which  the 
Lord  offers  to  him  ;  but  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  relief, 
to  avail  himself  of  private  confession  to  his  pastor,  and  in 
procuring  consolation  privately  to  solicit  the  aid  of  him, 
whose  office  it  is  both  publicly  and  privately  to  comfort  the 
people  of  God  with  the  truths  of  the  gospel."  "Moreover, 
that  the  flock  present  themselves  to  their  shepherd,  as  often 
as  they  desire  to  partake  of  the  Holy  Supper,  I  am  so  far. 
from  objecting  to,  that  I  very  much  desire  that  this  should, 
be  done  everywhere.  For  both  those  who  are  straightenod 
in  conscience  may  obtain  great  advantage  from  it,  and  those 
who  ought  to  be  admonished,  thus  afford  an  opportunity 
for  admonition ;  but  all  superstition  and  coercion  must  ever 
be  avoided." 


Note  H.  to  page  66. 

on  luther's  Calvinism. 

As  this  is  a  subject  on  which  it  is  easy  to  err,  and  on 
which  men  of  Christian  spirit  and  learning  have  entertained 
different  opinions,  it  may  be  useful  to  devote  a  few  moments 
to  its  elucidation.  It  is  of  no  use  here  to  quote  passages 
from  Luther's  works  teaching  the  doctrine.  Luther's  for- 
mer adhesion  to  the  Augustinian  view  of  this  subject  i-s 
admitted.  In  reply  to  the  passages  so  often  appealed  to 
from  Luther's  work  to  Erasmus,  which  was  written  in  the 
earlier  part  of  his  life,  about  twenty-one  years  before  his 
death,  when  he  had  not  yet  laid  off  many  of  the  Romish 
and  Augustinian  opinions  which  he  subsequently  rejected,, 
we  might  present  hundreds  of  passages  teaching  and  im- 
plying the  contrary  opinion.  We  present  a  single  specimen,, 
carefully  translated  by  us,  from  Walch's  edition  (the  best^ 
of  Luther  on  the  Galatians.  We  select  this  that  those  who 
have  the  old  English  translation  of  this  excellent  work,  may 
8 


86  PORTRAITURE     OF    L  UTHEK  AN  IS  M. 

compare  it,  and  see  how  uncertain  a  guide  such  translations 
are  on  disputed  points.  "And  all  the  prophets  foresaw  in 
Spirit,  that  Christ  would  be  the  greatest  sinner,  whose  like 
never  appeared  on  earth.  For  as  he  is  made  a  sacrifice  for 
the  sins  of  the  whole  world,  he  is  not  an  innocent  person 
and  without  sin,  is  not  the  Son  of  God  in  his  glory,  but  he- 
is  a  sinner  for  a  season,  forsaken  of  God.  Psalm  viii.  6. 
He  bears  the  sin  of  St.  Paul,  who  was  a  blasphemer,  a  per- 
secutor and  injurious  ;  of  St.  Peter,  who  denied  Christ ;  and 
of  David,  who  was  an  adulterer  and  a  murderer,  and  caused 
the  name  of  the  Lord  to  be  blasphemed  among  the  Gentiles. 
In  short,  he  is  the  person  who  hath  taken  upon  himself,  and 
bears  in  his  own  body  all  the  sins  of  all  men  in  the  whole 
world,  who  ever  have  lived,  are  now  living,  or  who  shall 
hereafter  live ;  not  as  if  he  had  himself  committed  those  sins, 
but  being  committed  by  us,  he  took  them  on  his  own  body, 
in  order  to  make  an  atonement  for  them  with  his  own 
blood  "*  We  might  refer  the  reader  to  a  work  entitled 
"Lutherus  Lutheraaus,"  of  700  pages,  8vo,  consisting  en- 
tirely of  extracts  from  his  works,  showing  that  on  all  the 
distinguishing  points  between  Calvinists  and  Lutherans,  Lu- 
ther occupied  the  ground  subsequently  maintained  by  his 
followers.  But  obviously,  even  this  would  not  settle  the 
point.  The  only  impartial  and  decisive  course  is  to  exam- 
ine all  his  works,  and  also  all  his  correspondence,  accord- 
ing to  their  date,  and  trace  the  gradual  change  in  his 
opinions.  This,  according  to  the  unanimous  testimony  of 
all  Germany,  no  man  has  ever  done  more  impartially  than 
the  celebrated  Dr.  Plank,  Professor  of  Theology  at  Gottin- 
gen,  in  the  preparation  of  his  invaluable  work,  entitled, 
"History  of  the  Rise,  Changes,  and  Formation  of  our  Pro- 
icy  lard  System  of  Doctrines,  from  the  commencement  of  the 
Reformation  till  the  Introduction  of  the  form  of  Concord. 
(1580.)  The  entire  impartiality  and  great  ability  of  this 
work,  which  cost  the  author  twenty  years  of  labor  and  in- 
vestigation, are  conceded  by  all  parties.  The  result  of  his 
examination  may  be  seen  in  the  following  valuable  quota- 
tion, which,  whilst  it  fully  sustains  the  positions  of  this  dis- 

*  See  Watch's  edition  of  Luther  on  tlie  Galatdans,  p.  276.  "  In  summa, 
er  ist  die  Person  die  an  ihrem  Leibe  tragt,  und  auf  sicli  geladen  hat  alle 
Snnden  aller  menschen  in  der  ganzen  Welt,  die  da  gewesen.  noch  sind, 
i  m  ,1  seyh  werden."     See  also  the  common  English  version,  p.  254. 


PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERAN  ISM.  87 

course,  also  renders  it  intelligible,  how  such  a  diversity  of 
sentiment  might  naturally  exist  on  this  subject.  "Never- 
theless, the  Lutheran  divines  did  not,  for  a  long  time,  see 
proper  to  take  any  notice  of  it,  (viz  :  of  the  prominence  and 
full  development  given  to  this  doctrine  by  Calvin,  and  of 
its  introduction  into  the  Swiss  churches;)  and  even  the 
zealots  of  Lower  Saxony,  who  had  taken  occasion  from  the 
Geneva  '  Consensus,'  to  renew  the  contest  concerning  the 
Lord's  supper,  observed  a  perfect  silence  on  this  incalcula- 
bly more  important  doctrine,  although  Calvin  appeared  to 
urge  them  the  more  explicitly  to  its  adoption.  Melanchthon 
alone  declared  to  him,  that  although  he  would  not  quarrel 
with  him  about  it,  he  would  never  consent  to  adopt  his 
(Calvin's)  views  on  predestination.*  But  the  silence  of 
the  other  Lutheran  divines  on  this  subject,  although  it  might 
appear  to  have  been  the  result  of  indifference,  was  owing 
to  a  very  satisfactory  reason,  of  which  the  greater  part  of 
them  were  well  aware.  It  cannot  be  denied,  that  the  Au- 
gustinian  theory  of  predestination  had  already  been  for- 
saken by  the  Lutheran  church.  Yet  her  divines  could  not 
but  feel,  that  they  had  changed  their  ground.  The  fact 
could  not  be  concealed,  that  Luther  had  once  embraced  this 
doctrine  in  its  full  rigor,  and  even  zealously  defended  it 
against  Erasmus,  and  that  his  early  adherents,  including 
even  Melancthon  himself,  had  at  first  done  the  same.  It  is 
indeed  true,  they  could  prove  that  the  doctrine  was  not  long 
retained,  and  that  Luther  himself  had  abandoned  it!  Bui 
even  this  concession  would  give  an  advantage  to  an  oppo- 
nent in  this  dispute,  which  they  were  utterly  unwilling  to 
concede  to  Calvin.  They  therefore  determined,  rather  not 
to  dispute  with  him  on  this  subject  at  all.  But  there  was 
another  reason,  which  probably  aided  in  causing  them  to 
keep  silence  on  this  subject.  The  greater  part  of  Lutheran 
divines  had,  like  Luther  himself,  receded  from  the  Augus- 
tinian  theory  of  predestination,  very  probably  without  them- 
selves being  fully  aware  how  this  result  had  been  brought 
about.  They  found  themselves  removed  from  it,  before 
they  had  wished  to  be;  and  it  was  Melancthon,  and  no  one 
else,  who  had  produced  the  change.     In  the  first  improved 

*  Melancthon  did  not  even  answer  the  first  letter  of  Calvin,  in  which 
he  requested  his  assent  to  the  doctrine.     See  Calvin's  epist.,  p.  133,  153. 


88  PORTRAITURE    OF    LUTHERANISM. 

edition  of  his  Loci  Theologici,  and  doubtless  still  earlier  in 
his  oral  lectures,  he  had  proposed  a  theory,  which,  both  in 
its  principles  and  consequences,  was  in  direct  contradiction 
to  the  Augustinian  view.  This  contradiction,  which  Me- 
lancthon  himself  took  no  pains  to  bring  to  light,  was  how- 
ever, at  first,  not  generally  perceived.  Hence  several  of 
the  principles  of  his  new  theory  were  adopted  with  the  less 
apprehension,  especially  as  each  one  of  them,  considered 
by  itself,  appeared  to  be  incontestibly  true,  both  according 
to  reason  and  Scripture.  Thus  his  cardinal  ideas  of  the 
divine  election  of  all  men  in  Christ,  of  the  universality  of 
divine  grace,  of  the  extension  of  the  atonement  and  merits 
of  Christ  to  all  men,  had  been  embraced  by  nearly  all  the 
divines  of  their  party,  and  ly  Luther  himself,  before  they 
perceived  that  their  views  of  an  absolute  decree  of  God, 
and  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  predestination,  were  utterly 
irreconcileable  with  them.  But,  when  at  last  they  made 
the  discovery,  they  found  their  position  in  several  respects 
an  embarrassing  one,  and  were  unable  immediately  to  ex- 
tricate themselves.  They  felt  unwilling,  not  only  so  sud- 
denly to  abandon  a  doctrine  which  they  had  professed,  but 
even  to  abandon  it  at  all.  They  were  conscious  that  Au- 
gustin's  doctrine  of  predestination  appeared  to  be  insepa- 
rably connected  with  some  other  parts  of  his  system,  such  as 
the  total  inability  of  man  to  do  any  thing  good,  which  they 
were  firmly  determined  never  to  relinquish.  On  the  other 
hand,  they  were  just  as  anxious  to  retain  the  features  of 
Melancthon's  theory,  which  they  had  adopted;  and  were 
therefore  brought  into  a  dilemma,  which  they  could  not  but 
feel.  The  greater  part  of  their  divines  now  adhered  to  the 
view  of  Melancthon,  that  God  desires  and  strives  to  bestow 
salvation  on  all  men  in  and  through  Christ,  from  which  it 
necessarily  followed,  that  his  decree  concerning  the  destiny 
of  each  individual  could  not  be  absolute.  But  they,  at  the 
same  time,  retained  the  opinion  of  Augustine,  that  depraved 
man  can  do  nothing  at  all  in  the  work  of  his  salvation,  can- 
not exert  even  the  feeblest  effort  of  his  will;  which  seemed 
just  as  necessarily  to  imply  that  the  salvation  or  damnation 
of  each  individual,  could  be  decided  only  by  an  absolute 
decree  of  God.  Some  of  them  probably  had  an  impression, 
that  there  must  be  some  method  of  avoiding  the  last  men- 
tioned inference  ;  but  their  views  were  indistinct.     Hence  it 


PORTRAITURE      OF    LUTHER AS  ISM.  89 

happened,  that  during  the  Synergistic  controversies  some  of 
them  again  embraced  the  Augustinian  theory  in  full.  The 
greater  part  of  them,  however,  believed  that  all  they  wanted 
was  a  more  systematic  adjustment  and  connexion  of  the 
opinions  they  entertained,  and  this  conviction  was  undoubt- 
edly the  principal  reason  for  that  caution,  with  which,  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  polemic  spirit  of  that  age,  they 
evaded  a  controversy  on  this  subject.  It  was,  therefore, 
not  until  1561,  that  a  formal  dispute  on  this  subject  occurred 
between  the  Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  divines,  the  occasion 
of  which  was  the  celebrated  Zanchius,  at  that  time  profes- 
sor of  theology  at  Strasburg."  Here,  then,  is  a  correct 
and  impartial  statement  of  the  facts  in  the  case,  which 
never  has  been,  and  never  can  be  successfully  controverted. 
3a 


III.    DISCOURSE. 


PATRIARCHS  OF  AMERICAN  LUTHERANISM. 


Respected  Auditors, 

We  congratulate  you  on  the  formation  of  the  Historical 
Society  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  our  country, 
as  an  event  of  no  small  significance  in  itself,  and  destined 
by  Providence  to  exert  a  salutary  and  enduring  influence  on 
our  portion  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom.  History  is  the  great 
storehouse  of  human  experience.  Without  it  each  individual 
can  profit  only  by  the  observations  of  his  own  threescore 
years  and  ten  ;  but  with  it  he  can  lift  the.  veil  of  past  gener- 
ations and  draw  wisdom  from  the  incidents  of  thousands  of 
years.  All  that  is  valuable  in  physics,  in  philosophy,  and 
in  religion,  is  thus  made  tributary  to  our  improvement.  It 
is  therefore  not  without  ground  that  Dionysius,  of  Halicar- 
nassus,  even  as  early  as  the  age  of  Augustus,  describes 
history  as  philosophy  teaching  by  examples.  But  when 
applied  to  the  church  of  God,  and  viewed  in  connexion 
with  the  inspired  oracles,  history  assumes  a  new  aspect, 
and  may  be  styled  "religion,  teaching  by  examples."  And 
has  Christ,  as  perpetual  Head  of  the  church,  promised  to 
abide  with  her  even  to  the  end  of  the  world  ?  Is  the  tui- 
tion of  the  Comforter,  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  privilege  of 
God's  people  in  every  age  ?  Then  may  we  regard  the  his- 
tory of  any  branch  of  Christ's  church,  viewed  in  the  light 
of  God's  word,  and  studied  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  as  inculcating  the  continued  and  progressive  instruc- 
tions of  the  Saviour  to  his  followers. 


PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN     LUTHERANISM.     91 

History,  impartially  and  pragmatically  studied,  is  there- 
fore the  best  test  of  the  influence  of  different  measures,  in 
reference  to  points  not  determined  in  the  inspired  statute- 
book.  Such  points  are  the  proper  degree  and  kind  of 
ministerial  training  desirable  in  any  age,  the  most  successful 
method  of  preaching  the  gospel,  whether  with  or  without 
notes,  and  of  conducting  the  several  parts  of  public  worship, 
of  prayer  with  or  without  liturgies,  the  effects  of  different 
modes  of  church-government,  the  practical  influence  of 
different  systems  of  doctrine,  the  best  method  of  conducting 
revivals  and  of  promoting  the  spiritual  interests  of  the 
church,  and  topics  of  a  similar  nature.  If,  then,  church- 
history  be  so  rich  in  various  instruction,  a  society  designed 
to  preserve  and  cultivate  any  portion  of  that  history  must 
be  an  interesting  phenomenon,  and  may,  if  rightly  conduct- 
ed, become  highly  important,  especially  in  our  age  of  rad- 
ical inquiry,  and  in  our  land  of  constitutional  divorce  between 
church  and  state. 

Of  the  American  church,  in  all  her  branches,  it  may 
emphatically  be  affirmed,  that  she  is  in  a  transition  state. 
Our  country  itself  is  yet  in  its  nascent  era.  With  few  ex- 
ceptions, the  principal  churches  of  our  land  have  been 
transplanted  from  countries  where  they  were  connected  with 
the  civil  government.  Such  was  the  case  with  the  Luther- 
an, the  Presbyterian,  the  German  Reformed,  the  Dutch 
Reformed,  the  Episcopal  and  the  Papal.  All  these,  except 
the  last,  have  thrown  off  all  allegiance  to  foreign  powers. 
Released  from  the  oppressive  embrace  of  civil  rulers,  the 
American  church,  in  all  her  Protestant  branches,  is  left  to 
breathe  freely,  and  to  adopt  such  rules  of  selfgovernment 
as  from  time  to  time  command  her  conscientious  judgment. 

Perhaps  an  extensive  induction  of  facts  would  show  it  to 
be  an  established  law  of  God's  mediatorial  kingdom,  that 
the  church  untrammelled  by  the  state,  is  seldom  or  never 
entirely  stationary.  Indeed,  even  when  controlled  by  the 
political  government,  she  has  been  stationary  only  in  her 
external  forms  and  rites.  The  life  of  godliness  in  her  min- 
isters and  members  has  been  subject  to  frequent  fluctuations. 
Of  this  the  history  of  the  Lutheran,  the  Reformed,  the 
Episcopal  and  the  Presbyterian  churches  in  Europe,  afford 
striking  examples.  Nor  have  the  different  churches  in  this 
new  world  been  exempt  from  similar  fluctuations,  both  in- 


32      PATRIARCHS    OF  AMERICAN    LUTHER AN ISM. 

ternal  and  external.     As  the  Presbyterian  church  was  orig- 
inally constituted  by  two  co-ordinate  Synods,  subsequently 
united  into  one  General  Assembly,  and  then  after  the  lapse 
of  years  again  divided  into  two   General  Assemblies, — di- 
vided also  in  the  days  of  Whitefield  and  the  Tennants  into 
old  and  new  lights ; — and  as   the  Episcopal   church  was 
originally  organized  into  separate  and  independent  dioceses 
without  any  connection  between  them,  subsequently  united 
into  a  General  Convention,  and  is  now  agitated  by  the  Semi- 
liomish  or  rather  Pene-Romish   errors  of  Puseyism; — so 
also  the  Lutheran  church  at  first  existed  in  separate  church- 
es,   before  the   Synod  of   Pennsylvania  was    formed,    and 
afterwards  in  separate  and  independent  Synods,  until  the 
General  Synod  was  established  in  1 820,  in  which  the  major 
part  of  the    Synods  is  already  united.     So   also  has  she 
fluctuated  in  zeal  and  enterprize,  and  will,  in  common  with 
her  sister  churches,  continue  to   do  so.     The   state  of  the 
church  in  any  particular  age,  is  ordinarily  in  some  degree 
the  result  of  gradual  development  under  the  various  influ- 
ences  in  which  she  is  placed,   and  in  which  the  gospel  is 
called  to  act  on  the  minds  of  her  members.     AVhilst,  there- 
fore, the  truths  of  the   bible  remain   unchanged,    and  the 
fundamental  attributes  of  piety  and  prosperity  in  a  church, 
are  the  same  in  every  age  ;  variations  in  collateral  circum- 
stances and  customs   naturally  will   and  must  occur.     We 
conclude  accordingly,  that  the  efforts  of  some  ultra  Lutherans 
in  our  Fatherland,  to  roll  back   the  wheels  of  time   about 
three  hundred  years,  and  to  bring  the  Lutheran   church  to 
the  standpoint  of  the  16lh  century,  is  no  less  unphilosoph- 
ical  than  anachronistic,  and  like  the  similar  efforts  of  a  few 
European  brethren  in  our   American    church,    necessarily 
must  and  ought  to  meet  with  signal  defeat. 

The  present  is  an  era  of  improvement  in  the  American 
church  in  general,  and  our  branch  of  it  in  particular.  As 
one  amongst  many  pleasing  evidences,  may  we  not  refer  to 
the  formation  of  that  association  under  whose  provisions  we 
are  now  convened?  In  selecting  a  subject  for  this  occasion, 
I  had  first  fixed  upon  the  general  history  of  the  earliest,  the 
colonial  era  of  our  history  in  this  country.  But  having 
received  the  promise  of  several  valuable  documents  at  a 
future  day,  1  resolved  to  change  the  subject,  and  have 
selected  as  my  theme : 


patriarchs   of   american   lutheran  ism.     93 

The  Fathers  of  the  Americo-Lutheran  church,  the 
enlightened  friends  of  spiritual  religion,  and  of  scrip- 
tural religious  revival. 

The  grand  desio-n  of  all  religion  and  of  all  christian  church 
organizations,  is  to  glorify  God  by  promoting  the  sanctifi- 
cation  of  the  church,  and  her  preparation  for  heaven.     Did 

not  the  Saviour  give  himself  for  us  that  he  might  redeem 

P  .  .  ° 

us  from  all  iniquity  and  purify  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people, 

zealous  of  good  works?  This  peculiar  people  is  his  church. 
The  association  is  represented  as  embodying  in  it,  "those 
that  are  sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus,  called  to  be  saints;"1 
"  who  are  children  of  God  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus  ;"2  "those 
whom  he  designs  to  sanctify  and  cleanse,  that  he  might  pre- 
sent them  to  himself  a  glorious  church,  not  having  spot  or 
wrinkle  or  any  such  thing."3  The  design  of  the  church  is 
therefore  eminently  spiritual,  and  that  church,  and  that 
state  of  the  church,  are  most  prosperous,  in  which  this  de- 
sign is  best  accomplished.  But  the  incessant  admonitions 
of  the  scriptures,  "to  watch,"  "to  arise,"  "to  return  to 
our  first  love,"  "to  awake  out  of  slumber,"  as  well  as  the 
experience  of  all  ages,  show  a  constant  tendency  in  Chris- 
tians and  Christian  churches  to  relapse.  When  a  church 
awakes  from  this  state  of  lethargy,  she  improves  in  spirit- 
uality, and  is  in  a  state  of  revival;  and  it  is  in  this  general 
sense  that  we  here  use  the  term,  as  signifying  the  spiritual 
prosperity  or  improvement  of  the  church,  including  alike 
individual  and  simultaneous  conversions.  This  state  of  re- 
vival has  been  happily  styled,  "the  church's  best  state,"  by 
a  writer,  whose  productions  the  Lutheran  church  will  cheer- 
fully acknowledge  as  part  of  her  literature.  This  state 
should  always  be  aimed  at  by  the  church.  Then  she  en- 
joys the  blessedness  for  which  the  Psalmist  prayed:  "  Oh  ! 
God  of  our  salvation,  wilt  thou  not  revive  us  again  that  thy 
people  may  rejoice  in  thee ;"  and  which  Habakkuk  im- 
plored :  "  0  Lord,  revive  thy  work  in  the  midst  of  the  jTears, 
in  the  midst  of  the  years  make  known ;  in  wrath  remem- 
ber mercy."  Then  do  individual  Christians  rejoice  in  the 
enjoyment  of  that  divine  manifestation,  the  temporary  loss 


(1)  ICor.  i.  1. 

(2)  Gal.  iii.  26. 

(3)  Eph.  iv.  26. 


94     PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM. 

of  which  Job  deplored  in  this  pathetic  language:  "0  that 
I  were  as  in  months  past,  as  in  the  days  when  God  pre- 
served me,  when  his  candle  shined  upon  my  head,  and  when 
in  his  light  I  walked  through  darkness/' 

In  examining  the  patriarchs  of  American  Lutheranism 
from  the  point  of  observation  thus  denned,  we  propose  to 
inquire  : 

I.  What  were  the  views  of  spiritual  religion  and 

RELIGIOUS    REVIVAL,    IN  WHICH    THESE    MEN    WERE    EDU- 
CATED ? 

II.  What  was  their  practice  amid  their  altered  cir- 
cumstances  IN  THIS   WESTERN   WORLD  ? 

What  were  the  views  on  the  subject  of  our  theme,  which 
these  men  had  imbibed  in  their  youth  ?  Not  long  before 
the  period  under  consideration,  the  church  in  Germany 
had  experienced  a  very  extensive  and  remarkable  change. 
That  spirit  of  indomitable  adherence  to  every  item  of  what 
we  regard  as  truth,  and  of  polemic  zeal  in  its  defence, 
which  were  necessary  to  make  the  reformers  equal  to  the 
trials  of  their  day,  was  not  easily  laid  aside  after  the  ne- 
cessity in  which  it  had  originated  had  passed  away.  It 
was  transmitted  to  successive  generations,  and  contributed, 
in  connexion  with  other  causes,  to  impress  a  peculiarly  po- 
lemic character  on  the  German  churches  throughout  their 
history. 

But  whilst  the  fathers  of  our  Lutheran  Zion  were  grow- 
ing up,  the  church  in  their  native  land,  was  enjoying  a 
glorious  state  of  revival.  The  dead  formality  of  the  17th 
century  had  been  broken  up  by  the  influence  of  Spener  and 
his  coadjutors.  This  effect  was  chiefly  due  to  their  practi- 
cal and  biblical  preaching,  to  Spener's  various  publications, 
especially  his  Pia  Desideria,  and  his  Spiritual  Priesthood 
of  the  Laity  ;  as  also  to  his  Collegia  pietatis,  or  private  bib- 
lical prayer-meetings,  in  which  after  a  lecture  by  the  pas- 
tor on  some  part  of  scripture,  any  male  member  present 
was  permitted  to  address  the  meeting  on  the  same  subject, 
decently  and  in  order.1  By  all  these  means,  soon  employed 
by  numerous  other  pastors,  a  great  and  extensive  reforma- 
tion,  or  revival  of  spiritual  religion,  was  effected  in  the 

(1)  "Watch's  Strcitigkeiten  &c.  p.  560. 


PATRIARCHS     OF    AMERICAN     LUTHER  A  WISM.      95 

church  in  Germany.  The  influence  of  Franke,  and  the 
establishment  of  the  orphan-house  and  theological  school  at 
Halle,  gave  rapid  and  general  extension  to  this  reform,  and 
supplied  a  large  part  of  Germany  with  pious  and  practical 
preachers.  Listen  to  the  testimony  of  Franke,  the  elder, 
himself,  even  in  his  own  life-time  :  "  Many  thousands  of 
souls  have  been  wakened  up  to  true  repentance  ;  yes,  many 
thousands  of  ministers  have  been  awakened."  ' 

In  the  discussions  of  the  so  called  Pietistic  Controversies, 
these  men  exploded  the  old  notion  of  adiaphoristic  actions, 
or  actions,  which  though  not  good,  were  said  by  their  op- 
ponents also  not  to  be  sinful;  such,  forsooth,  as  dancing, 
attending  the  theatre,  playing  cards,  &a.;2  and  gave  cur- 
rency to  the  only  view,  which  can  satisfy  a  spiritually  en- 
lightened mind,  namely,  tiiat  every  action,  word  and  thought 
is  embraced  in  the  divine  law,  and  is  either  sinful  or  holy. 
They  also  vindicated  the  necessity  of  regeneration  and  true 
piety  to  the  minister  of  the  gospel,  the  necessity  of  a  better 
observance  of  the  Christian  Sabbath,  and  the  spiritual  priest- 
hood of  all  Christians,  that  is,  their  duty  to  labor  for  the 
kingdom  of  Christ.  These  views,  which  fall  little  if  any 
thing  short  of  our  ideas  of  true  piety  and  ministerial  fidelity 
at  the  present  day,  were  generally  received  by  the  evangel- 
ical party  in  Germany  in  the  time  of  Franke  and  his  suc- 
cessors ;  and  it  was  from  them  that  these  views  were  imbibed 
by  the  fathers  of  our  church  at  Halle.  Indeed,  Muhlen- 
berg himself  was  called  to  his  work  by  Franke  the  younger. 

Of  the  deep-rooted  and  formidable  opposition  to  this 
great  moral  regeneration  of  the  church  in  Germany,  the 
pietistic  controversies,  and  the  hundreds  of  publications  con- 
cerning them,  and  even  the  edicts  of  civil  rulers  bear  ample 
testimony.  Yet  those  holy  men  maintained  their  ground, 
and  yielded  not  an  iota  of  what  they  regarded  as  the  truth 
of  God.  With  such  examples  before  their  eyes,  were  such 
men  as  Muhlenberg,  Brunholtz,  Handschuh,  iSchultz,  Bager, 
Krug,  Kunze  and  others  educated:  and  as  several  of  them 
had  labored  for  a  season  as  teachers  in  the  school  at  Halle, 
it  was  but  natural  to  expect  that  in  pursuing  their  eonvic- 

(1)  Parcenetic.  Prelect.  YIIL  pt.  4,  and  Guericke's  Kirchengeschichte, 
p.  885. 

(2)  Guericke's  Kirchengescliichte..  p.  875, 


96    PATRIARCHS     OF    AMERICAN     Ll'THERAMSM. 

tions  of  duty  in  this  western  world,  their  course  would  be 
substantially  the  same. 

II.  We  are  thus  conducted  to  the  second  topic  of  our 
inquiry : 

What  was  their  practice  amid  their  altered  circum- 
stances  IN   THIS   WESTERN  WORLD%? 

When  they  arrived  in  this  country,  they  found  (.he  public 
attention  much  excited  on  the  subject  of  religion.  White- 
field  had  arrived  here  four  years  before  Muhlenberg,  and 
was  electrifying  our  different  cities  and  towns  by  his  apos- 
tolic eloquence;  the  pietistic  influence  had  reached  Eng- 
land, and  Wesley,  after  having  spent  two  years  in  our 
Southern  States.,  had  returned  to  England,  and  there  com- 
menced his  indefatigable  labors  and  wonderful  enterprises, 
which  excited  attention  even  on  this  side  the  Atlantic. 
Muhlenberg  and  their  coadjutors  were  animated  by  a  simi- 
lar spirit,  and  tasked  their  utmost  powers  for  the  further- 
ance of  the  gospel  among  their  German  brethren.  White- 
field,  Tennant,  and  the  fathers  of  our  church,  held  each 
other  in  high  and  mutual  esteem.  They  cultivated  each 
other's  acquaintance,  and  preached  for  each  other.  Of 
Tennant,  Mr.  Handschuh  thus  expresses  himself  in  his 
diary:  "May  17th,  1748.  This  afternoon,  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Tennant,  a  Presbyterian  minister,  tisited  us,  who  is  much 
beloved  by  us.  Our  conversations  were  edifying,  agreeable 
and  affectionate.  To  our  great  gratification  and  edification, 
he  tarried  with  us  till  late  at  night/' '  The  estimate  which 
Whitefield  placed  upon  their  character,  is  evinced  by  his 
personal  efforts  in  taking  collections  in  aid  of  our  brethren 
in  South  Carolina,  and  his  preaching  for  Muhlenberg  in 
Philadelphia ;  as  also  by  the  fact,  that,  at  the  death  of  the 
pious  Handschuh,  though  unable  from  sickness  to  walk  in 
the  funeral  procession,  he  had  himself  conveyed  alongside 
of  it  in  his  carriage.  Hear  from  the  lips  of  Muhlenberg 
himself,  an  account  oir  that  solemn  event,  which  is  interest- 
ing also  as  showing  the  general  estimation  in  wliich  the  fa- 
ta tD  » 

thers  of  our  church  were  held  by  the  public  in  this  great 
city,  at  that  time  however  containing  a  population  of  only 
15,000  souls,  with  seven  churches,  viz  :  a  Swedish  Lutheran, 


(1)  llallisclie  Naclirichtea,  p.  104. 


PATRIARCHS    OF   AMERICAN    LUTHER  AN  ISM.       97 

an  Episcopal,  a  Presbyterian,  a  Baptist,  a  Moravian,  and 
a  Romish  church,  together  with  the  meeting-house  of 
the  Society  of  Friends.1  "  It  was  Thursday,  October  11th, 
1764.  At  1  o'clock,  P.  M.,"  says  Muhlenberg,  "  eight  bells 
were  rung  on  the  high  church,  and  three  on  the  cupola  of  our 
school-house,  in  memory  of  the  deceased,  which  produced 
considerable  sensation  in  the  city.  At  2  o'clock  the  teach- 
ers and  ministers  assembled  in  the  conference  room,  in  the 
school-house.  Two  Doctors  of  Divinity,  two  Professors 
from  the  English  Academy,  three  ministers  of  the  Episco- 
pal church,  two  Presbyterian  ministers,  one  Baptist,  one 
Swedish  Lutheran,  and  two  German  Reformed  ministers, 
were  in  attendance,  as  also  Whitefield,  with  his  faithful  com- 
panion, Mr.  Wright,  who  accompanied  him  from  England. 
Therewith  the  Rev.  Hartwick,  Voigt  and  myself,  constituted 
the  clerical  attendants,  and  all  walked  before  the  corpse  ex- 
cept Mr.  Yoigt  and  myself,  wTho,  together  with  the  widow 
and  children,  followed  the  coffin  as  mourners.  Then  came 
the  English  physician,  the  church  council,  after  which 
the  citizens  of  different  denominations  followed  in  proces- 
sion. When  wre  arrived  at  the  church,  a  great  number  of 
persons  had  entered  through  the  windows,  for  the  doors 
were  yet  locked.  The  church  was  soon  so  crowded  that 
we  were  apprehensive  the  galleries  might  break  down,  and 
many  persons  be  kdled  or  wounded."  2  It  seems  evident, 
therefore,  that  the  framers  of  the  Americo-Lutheran  church 
were  in  habits  of  cordial  intercourse  with  Whitefield  and. 
Tennant,  the  two  most  active  revival  preachers  of  that  day 
in  our  whole  country ;  and  no  man  acquainted  with  their 
reports  to  Halle,  made  during  many  years,  will  doubt  that 
their  whole  ministry  was  conducted  in  the  same  devotional 
and  fervid  spirit. 

What  wras  the  condition  of  the  Lutheran  church  at  the 
time  of  their  arrival  ?  Let  Muhlenberg  himself  be  our 
informant.  In  his  diary  of  1763,  about  a  year  after  he 
reached  his  field  of  labor,  he  says  :  "  It  seems  as  if  this 
wTere  the  time  in  which  God  will  visit  us  with  special 
gracious  influences.  And  indeed  it  is  high  time.  If  our 
poor   Lutherans   had  been  neglected  a  few  years  longer, 


(1)  Heinsius  Kirchengeschiclite.  p.  685. 

(2)  Hallischc  Nachrichten,  p.  11G6-7. 

9 


98    PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN     LUTHER AKISM. 

they  would  have  been  scattered  altogether,  and  relapsed 
into  heathenism.  There  are,  moreover,  almosi  number- 
less sects,  opinions  and  temptations.  Nor  is  there  any 
lack  of  atheists,  deists,  naturalists  and  free-masons.  In 
short,  it  seems  as  if  there  were  not  a  sect  in  the  world, 
which  is  not  fostered  here.  There  are  people  assembled 
here  from  nearly  all  parts  of  the  world.  What  would  not 
be  tolerated  in  Europe,  hnds  full  scope  here.  The  most 
scandalous  things  against  God,  and  his  word,  are  freely 
and  publicly  uttered  here.  Throughout  the  whole  land 
there  are  many  thousands,  who  were  baptized  and  confirmed 
as  Lutherans,  but  are  now  scattered  abroad  and  neglect 
religion.  Such  is  the  lamentable  condition  and  religious  de- 
cline amongst  our  own  poor  Lutherans,  that  tears  of  blood 
could  not  sufficiently  deplore  it.  Parents  in  many  cases 
suffered  their  children  to  grow  up  unbaptized,  without  in- 
struction, and  to  run  into  heathenism.  The  great  mass  of 
them  are  yet  wild,  and  it  may  easily  be  supposed,  that  one 
year  will  not  suffice  to  root  out  the  disorder  and  confusion 
which  crept  into  the  people  in  thirty.1  And  what  was  the 
course  by  which  they  hoped  to  remedy  these  disorders,  to 
promote  spirituality  in  religion,  and  to  build  up  the  king- 
dom of  the  Redeemer,  among  the  lost  sheep  of  the  German 
fold  ?  The  amplest  investigation  will  prove,  that  they  pur- 
sued the  good  old  gospel  plan.  They  preached  the  word 
with  great  zeal  and  fidelity,  in  season  and  out  of  season, 
publicly  and  from  house  to  house.  They  administered  the 
sacraments  with  great  solemnity,  and  in  all  their  pastoral 
duties  throughout  the  week,  they  watched  for  souls  as  those 
that  must  give  an  account.  In  short,  they  belonged  to  the 
most  zealous  and  faithful  preachers  of  the  pietistic  school, 
of  Spener  and  Franke,  in  the  land  of  our  fathers,  and  mod- 
ified their  ministrations  to  suit  the  altered  circumstances  of 
our  country.  In  Germany  the  pietistic  reform  was  ham- 
pered by  civil  interference.  Here  in  Pennsylvania,  the 
union  of  church  and  state  was  happily  abolished,  even  prior 
to  our  independence  of  Great  Britain.  For  the  enlightened 
and  benevolent  William  Penn  at  once  proclaimed  universal 
tolerance  for  all  religions.  Thus  did  our  fathers  find  them- 
selves free  to  follow  the  dictates  of  their  own  conscience  in 

(1)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  17. 


PATRIARCHS     OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERAN  ISM.     99 

the  forms   of   worship,  government  and  discipline.     And 
what  was  their  practice  ? 

1.  They  proved  themselves  friends  of  spiritual  religion 
and  religious  revival  by  their  diligence  and  faithfulness  in 
preaching.  They  stood  up,  not  as  philosophers  to  publish 
the  speculations  of  Plato  or  Aristotle,  of  their  own  far- 
famed  Leibnitz  or  of  Locke,  but  as  ministers  of  the  New 
Testament,  to  preach  Christ  crucified,  to  the  Jews  a  stum- 
bling block,  and  foolishness  to  the  Greeks.  This  duty  they 
performed,  not  as  hirelings,  glad  when  their  day's  work 
was  over;  but  like  the  primitive  apostles  before  them, 
"  daily  in  the  temple  and  in  every  house,  they  ceased  not 
to  teach  and  to  preach  Jesus  Christ."  The  manner  in 
which  they  preached,  may  be  aptly  learned  from  a  minute 
of  a  Pastoral  Conference,  held  at  the  house  of  Mr.  Muhlen- 
berg, Oct.  20th,  1760,  in  which  the  question,  "What  is  the 
best  method  of  preaching,"  was  fully  and  freely  discussed. 
There  were  present,  Dr.  Muhlenberg,  Provost  Wrangel,  of 
the  Swedish  Lutheran  church,  Rev.  Wm.  Kurtz,  Jr.,  R,ev. 
Gerock,  of  Lancaster,  Rev.  Nicholas  Kurtz,  of  Tulpehocken, 
Rev.  Hansile,  of  Reading,  Rev.  Weigand,  of  New  York, 
and  Bryzelius,  of  the  Swedish  Lutheran  church.  Pvev. 
Wrangel,  being  requested  to  present  his  views,  said,  "it 
was  his  habit  to  take  a  portion  of  the  New  Testament,  and 
to  discuss  it  analytically,  exegetically,  and  by  way  of  ap- 
plication." His  sermons  are  carefully  premeditated,  and 
usually  of  three  quarters  of  an  hour's  length.  Afterwards 
he  questions  his  hearers  in  order  to  learn  what  they  retain 
of  the  sermon,  "and,"  [says  Muhlenberg,  "show  them  the 
nervum  probandi  of  the  texts  adduced,  and  how  to  make  a 
suitable  application  of  them  to  themselves."  Another  pas- 
tor, says  Muhlenberg,  in  a  country  station,  (probably  he 
meant  himself,)  pursues  nearly  the  same  course,  first  preach- 
ing, and  then  recapitulating  the  discourse  by  question  and 
answer.  "In  our  discourses,"  said  this  pastor,  "we  ought 
to  make  no  ostentatious  display  of  learning,  but  study  sim- 
plicity ;  we  should  neither  strike  into  the  air,  nor  employ 
low  and  vulgar  expressions,  not  introduce  too  much  matter 
into  a  sermon,  but  discuss  the  subject  fully,  and  apply  it  to 
the  heart.  Our  sermons  should  not  be  dry,  but  practical. 
Religion  should  be  presented  not  as  a  burden  but  as  a  plea- 
sure.    Avoid  personalities.     Let  personal  difficulties  be  set- 


100     PATRIARCHS     OF    AMERICAN     LUTJIE  R  AN  IS  M  . 

tied  in  your  pastoral  visits.  The  elenchus  must  not  be  neg- 
lected. Present  your  thesis  rightly  ;  neglect  not  the  anti- 
thesis. As  our  members  are  resident  among  all  kinds  of 
hostile  errorists,  controversies  cannot  be  avoided,  yet  you 
should  not  mention  names.  Carefully  inquire  into  the  mo- 
ral condition  of  the  members  of  the  church,  and  let  it 
serve  as  a  homiletic  rule  for  you.  Let  us  sow  with  tears, 
let  us  aim  at  the  ediheation  of  each  individual  soul,  and 
give  heed  to  ourselves  and  our  doctrine."  '  Certainly,  we 
seldom  find  more  homiletic  wisdom  compressed  into  so  small 
a  compass.  The  custom  of  examining  the  congregation  on 
the  principal  topics  of  the  sermon,  also  led  to  the  practice, 
then  prevalent,  of  the  hearers  taking  their  bibles  into  the 
church,  and,  during  the  sermon,  referring  to  the  passage 
quoted  by  the  preacher.2  Nor  ought  the  moderate  length 
of  Dr.  Wrangel's  sermons  be  forgotten  by  those  who  often 
lose  sight  of  Luther's  maxim,  that  "one  of  the  cardinal 
excellences  of  a  preacher  is  to  know  when  to  leave  off." 

Nor  did  these  holy  men  shun  to  expose  the  fashionable 
vices  of  the  day.  They  seem  to  have  felt  the  truth  of 
Paul's  maxim:  "If  ye  yet  seek  to  please  men,  ye  are  no 
longer  the  servants  of  Christ."  So  faithfully  did  Dr.  Kimze 
direct  the  artillery  of  the  pulpit  against  the  vice  of  Sabbath 
breaking,  then  as  now  specially  prevalent  among  European 
Germans,  that  they  became  greatly  excited,  and  published 
some  abusive  articles  against  him  in  the  English  newspa- 
pers, the  German  editor  wisely  declining  to  insert  such  ar- 
ticles. Like  Paul  these  devoted  servants  of  Christ  seem 
"to  have  kept  back  nothing  that  wras  profitable,"  and  could 
say,  "we  are  pure  from  the  blood  of  all  men,  for  we  have 
not  shunned  to  declare  the  whole  counsel  of  God." 

Muhlenberg  availed  himself  of  various  suitable  expedi- 
ents, some  of  which  might  be  called  new  measures,  to  ar- 
rest the  attention  of  the  hearer.  "A  young  man,"  says 
he,  between  twenty  and  thirty  years  of  age,  has  frequently 
visited  me  and  engaged  in  edifying  conversation  and  prayer. 
He  told  me  that  he  had  been  awakened  to  seek  his  salva- 
tion in  Christ,  by  impressive  evangelical  hymns.  It  is  in 
my  custom   (he  added,)  occasionally  after  sermon  to  read 


(1)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  859,  860, 

(2)  Ilallische  Nachrichten,  p.  624. 


PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHER AKISM.     101 

a  stirring  and  edifying  hymn  adapted  to  the  discourse,  to 
expound  several  of  its  phrases,  and  to  recommend  these 
hymns  to  my  hearers.  Nor  has  the  practice  been  unblessed, 
for  the  audience  more  easily  understand  such  representa- 
tions, and  often  wonder,  that  they  have  sung  these  hymns 
a  hundred  times  without  having  understood  their  force  and 
beauty.1 

The  subjects  of  their  discourses  were  generally  of  the 
most  practical  kind.  Of  them  could  not  be  affirmed  what 
the  celebrated  author  of  the  Night  Thoughts  said  of  the 
Episcopal  ministers  of  England  : 

How  oft  when  Paul  has  served  us  with  a  test, 
Has  Plato,  Tully,  Epictelus  preached  t 

Not  only  their  subjects,  but  the  whole  character  of  their 
preaching  was  eminently  practical  and  biblical,  as  their  dia- 
ries abundantly  prove.  May  24,  1752.  "This  forenoon," 
6ays  Muhlenberg,  "I  preached  at  Hackinsock  on  regenera- 
tion, and  this  afternoon  on  the  conversion  of  Cornelius,  the 
centurion.  The  crowd  was  so  great,  that  not  halt  of  it 
could  gain  admittance  to  the  church.  The  others  drove 
their  vehicles  near  the  windows  of  the  church,  and  stand- 
ing in  numbers  on  them,  listened  to  the  sermon."  On  the 
25th,  he  catechised  the  young,  and  on  the  26th  preached 
again  at  the  same  place.  I  cannot  forbear  to  call  the  spe- 
cial attention  of  this  audience  to  the  record  of  that  day's 
labor.  "This  morning,"  says  he,  "I  preached  in  the  Lovr 
Dutch,  on  John  vii.  38,  and  the  hearers  received  the  word 
with  great  avidity  amid  many  tears.  In  the  afternoon,  I 
preached  English,  because  a  number  of  English  femiliej) 
reside  here  and  have  no  preacher.  They  offered  to  unite 
with  our  church,  if  I  would  remain  and  preach  for  them."? 
Happy  would  it  have  been  not  only  for  the  Lutheran  chur  h 
as  such,  but  for  the  souls  of  thousands  and  tens  of  thous- 
ands, descended  from  the  Germans  of  that  day,  had  the 
other  ministers  of  our  church  imitated  the  example  of  Muh- 
lenberg, in  cultivating  an  acquaintance  with  the  Ei  \ 
language,  or  had  they  at  least  trained   young  men   for  this 

(1)  Hallische  Nachrkhtea,  p.  204. 

(2^  Hallische  Nuchrichten   p.  488. 
9a 


102    PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAS    LU  TH  E  R  A  K  I  S  M  . 

work,  and  thus  furnished  the  rising  generation  with  the 
ordinances  of  God's  house  in  a  language  they  could  under- 
stand. Instead  of  five  or  six  Lutheran  churches  in  this 
city,  we  should  doubtless  now  have  at  least  twenty,  and 
thousands  of  the  young,  who,  suspended  between  attach- 
ment to  the  church  of  their  fathers  on  one  hand,  and  their 
better  acquaintance  with  the  language  of  the  land  on  the 
other,  never  attached  themselves  to  any  church,  would  pro- 
bably have  been  saved  from  entering  eternity  in  that  un- 
blessed state,  unsheltered  by  the  covenant  of  God's  people. 
But,  excepting  Dr's.  Muhlenberg  and  Kunze,  we  are  not 
aware  that  any  of  the  others  attempted  to  preach  in  the 
English  language.     Dr.  Hellmuth  at  one  time  instructed 

O  DO 

catechumens  in  English,  but  subsequently  adopted  the  con- 
trary course.  No  provision  was  made  to  train  up  an  En- 
glish ministry.  Indeed  the  majority  of  those  fathers  appear 
to  have  set  themselves  to  work  to  banish  the  English  lan- 
guage entirely  from  their  churches,  to  induce  as  many  of 
the  young  as  possible  to  learn  German,  and  to  hand  over 
those  who  either  would  not  or  could  not,  to  the  spiritual 
care  of  any  English  denomination,  into  whose  hands  they 
might  fall.  In  their  liturgy,  published  in  1786,  they  have 
introduced  a  prayer,  for  which  we  should  be  hard  pressed 
to  find  either  scripture,  precept  or  example,  and  which  is 
not  altogether  unlike  the  use  made  of  religion  by  Buona- 
parte, on  a  different  occasion.  Well  knowing  the  power  of 
early  religious  education,  and  feeling  that  the  throne  which 
he  had  usurped,  needed  some  strong  pillars  for  its  support, 
that  remarkable  man,  alike  the  blessing  and  the  curse  of 
Europe,  summoned  before  him  the  dignitaries  of  the  Gal- 
lican  church  in  1806.  He  commanded  them  to  frame  a 
catechism  to  be  taught  to  the  children  of  the  French  nation, 
and  insert  into  it  a  series  of  questions  and  answers,  teach- 
ing that  God  by  his  special  providence  had  raised  up  Napo- 
leon as  the  deliverer  of  France,  that  he  had  endowed  him 
with  extraordinary  qualifications  in  times  of  great  difficulty  ; 
and  that  it  was  the  duty  of  all  good  Christians,  to  honor 
him,  pay  tax  to  him,  serve  in  his  army,  to  pray  for  him  as 
■the  instrument  of  God,  and  yield  him  a  cordial  allegiance. 
Thus  our  fathers,  in  their  liturgy,  taught  their  churches  to 
pray  "that  the  Germans  of  our  land  might  never  disown 


PATRIARCHS    OF   AMERICAN    LUTHERANlSM.     103 

their  ancestry,  and  that  the  German  churches,  and  German 
schools  might  be  perpetuated  here."  l 

In  regard  to  public  worship,  it  is  evident  that  their  grand 
design,  to  convert  sinners  and  edify  saints,  led  them  to  some 
new  measures,  to  some  innovations  on.  the  customs  of  Ger- 
many. It  appears  that  for  about  twelve  years  they  used  no 
liturgy  at  all  in  ordinary  worship.  After  some  time  they 
were  induced,  in  order  to  preserve  uniformity  in  modes  and 
ceremonies,  to  compose  a  liturgy  for  themselves.  In  1754 
Muhlenberg,  Brunholtz  and  Handschuh,  in  their  joint  report 
to  Halle,  say:  "We  found  it  necessary  for  present  use,  to 
compose  a  short  directory  for  worship,  ( Agende  or  Kirchen- 
ordnung)  for  the  sake  of  unity  (uniformity)  in  the  ceremo- 
nies of  public  worship.  We  adapted  it  to  the  circumstances 
of  our  congregations,  which  had  come  from  different  parts 
of  Germany.  We  took  as  a  basis  the  directory  of  the  Ger- 
man Lutheran  Church  at  Savoy,  in  London,  as  we  had  no 
other  at  hand."2  If  they  had  no  other,  they  had  not  the 
Hallish  liturgy,  to  which  they  had  been  accustomed  in 
Germany ;  and  it  follows,  that  during  the  previous  twelve 
years,  they  probably  used  none,  except  on  special  occasions, 
when  that  of  Savoy  was  perhaps  employed.  Even  after  this 
time  we  rarely  lind  in  their  detailed  descriptions  of  their 
preaching,  any  reference  to  the  liturgy;  except  on  sacra- 
mental or  ordination  occasions.  At  other  times  their  prayers 
at  public  worship  appear,  during  that  period,  to  have  been 
extemporaneous.  That  they  studied  simplicity  in  adopting 
set  forms  of  the  church  in  Germany,  is  evident  from  the 
directions  given  by  the  Synod  in  1784,  to  the  committee 
appointed  to  prepare  and  publish  a  hymnbook  for  this  coun- 
try, namely,  chiefly  to  follow  the  hymnbook  of  Halle ;  but 
to  omit  the  gospels  and  epistles,  for  the  day  of  the  Apostles, 
and  for  all  other  unusual  festivals,  that  is,  festivals  observed 
by  the  church  in  Germany  but  not  in  this  country.  They 
reduced  the  festivals  to  those  few  which  are  now  observed 
by  us,  Christmas,  (New  Year, )  Good  Friday,  Easter,  Ascen- 
sion day  and  Whitsunday.  Their  liturgy,  as  published  in 
1786,  is,   as  its  preface  informs  us,  longer  than  the  forms 

(1)  See  p.  7  of  Kirchen-Agende  der  Evangclisch-Lntherischen  Verein- 
igteu  Gcrneiudcn  in  Nord  America,  Philadelphia,  gedruckt  bci  Melchior 
Steiner.  in  der  Reesstrasse,  1786. 

(2)  Hallische  Nachriehten.  p.  675. 


104    PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM. 

previously  used  by  them ;  yet  it  is  not  as  long  as  the  one 
published  by  the  Synod  of  Pennsylvania  in  1819  ;  nor  more 
than  half  as  large  and  copious  as  the  one  recently  adopted 
by  several  Synods,  and  accepted  by  the  last  General  Synod. 
They  seem  to  have  thought,  and  we  think  justly,  that  the 
formal,  or  stereotyped  part  of  worship,  ought  to  be  short, 
that  the  time  may  be  chiefly  employed  in  exercises  of  prayer 
and  preaching.  That  liturgy  leaves  it  optional  with  the 
preacher  to  read  the  gospel  or  epistle  of  the  day,  or  the 
portion  of  Sacred  Scripture  containing  his  text,  and  it  con- 
tains no  prayers  whatever  for  any  festival.  The  custom  in 
our  church  in  this  country,  as  also  in  the  Dutch  Reformed 
church,  has  been  from  time  immemorial,  to  use  the  liturgy 
only  on  synod ical,  sacramental,  funeral  and  wedding  occa- 
sions, excepting  in  the  cities  and  a  few  larger  towns,  where 
the  populace  appears  to  look  with  a  more  favorable  eye  upon 
forms  and  ceremonies.  To  this  individual  liberty  of  each 
minister,  we  would  adhere  as  a  fundamental  principle  of  our 
American  Church,  never  to  be  relinquished  for  any  consid- 
eration whatever.  These  chastened  views  on  the  subject  of 
forms  in  worship,  go  far  to  explain  the  reception  given  by 
these  fathers,  to  the  invitation  addressed  to  their  Synod  by 
the  late  venerable  Bishop  White  of  this  city,  to  unite  in  a 
body  to  the  Episcopal  church.  That  proposition  was  treated 
with  due  respect,  but  unhesitatingly  declined,  although  the 
bishop  explicitly  offered  that  their  Lutheran  ordination 
should  be  acknowledged  as  valid.  That  bishop  was  an 
honor  to  his  church.  He  had  studied  his  bible  and  the 
ancient  history  of  the  church  of  Christ  with  an  enlarged 
heart  and  enlightened  viewrs,  and  never  dreamt  of  denying 
the  ministerial  character  of  his  brethren  in  other  churches, 
or  of  claiming  divine  authority  of  diocesan  episcopacy.  Of 
similar  nature  were  the  views  of  the  most,  learned  and  dis- 
tinguished divines  and  scholars,  even  of  the  Episcopal  church 
itself,  such  as  Archbishop  Whitgift,  Dr.  Willet,  Bishops  Bil- 
son,  Morton,  Jewell,  Croft,  and  Burnet,  Drs.  Whitacker, 
Stillingtleet,  and  Il-awies,  Sir  Peter  King,  and  Archbishops 
Usher  and  Tillotson.  A  single  quotation  may  suffice  from 
a  pamphlet  of  Bishop  White,  written  principally  to  recom- 
mend a  temporary  departure  from  the  line  of  episcopal 
succession,  on  the  ground  that  diocesan  bishops  could  not 
then  (during  the  American  Revolution)  be  had.     "Now, 


PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHER A NISM       1 05 

(says  he)  if  even  those  who  held  episcopacy  to  be  of  divine 
right,  conceive  the  obligation  to  it  not  to  be  binding  when 
that  idea  would  be  destructive  of  public  worship  ;  much 
more  must  they  think  so  (referring  to  himself  and  others^) 
who  indeed  venerate  and  prefer  thai  form  as  the  most  ancient 
and  eligible  ;  but  without  any  idea  of  divine  right  in  the  xise. 
This  the  author  (viz.  Bishop  White,)  believes  to  be  tin  sen- 
timent of  the  great  body  of  Episcopalians  in  America,  in 
which  respect,  they  have  in  their  favor  unquestionably  the 
sense  of  the  Church  of  England,  and,  as  he  believes,  the 
opinions  of  her  most  distinguished  prelates  for  piety,  virtue 
and  abilities."  With  this  manly  and  truthful  acknowledg- 
ment, how  ludicrously  does  the  sentiment  of  the  Puseyites 
and  some  other  high-churchmen  of  the  present  day  com- 
pare, who  virtually  unchurch  all  other  denominations  of  our 
land,  except  their  own  and  their  twin  sister  of  Rome,  and 
who  either  have,  or  seem  to  have,  seriously  persuaded  them- 
selves, that  all  other  ministers  are  but  laymen,  and  their 
ministrations  destitute  of  the  divine  seal ! 

If,  then,  it  is  asked,  was  their  preaching  spiritual,  was  it 
revival  preaching  ?  We  would  answer,  that,  in  the  true 
and  best  sense  of  the  phrase,  it  was.  They  evidently  aimed 
with  the  utmost  sincerity  and  faithfulness  to  awaken  and 
convert  careless  sinners,  to  edify  the  true  believer  and  to 
revive,  to  build  up  the  church  of  the  Redeemer. 

Yet  it  is  worthy  of  note,  that  nowhere  in  any  of  their 
reports,  so  far  as  we  know,  is  there  any  evidence  of  their 
ever  having  designedly  made  or  allowed  any  disorder,  or 
unnecessary  noise  during  worship.  We  say  designedly, 
made — for  we  are  convinced,  that  no  minister  will  long  be 
disturbed  by  unnecessary  noise  during  worship,  who  is 
known  to  disapprove  of  it,  and  who  does  not  either  tacitly 
or  expressly,  yield  it  some  encouragement.  We  say  unne- 
cessary noise :  because  awakened  sinners  did  sometimes 
groan  or  weep  audibly,  and  such  unavoidable  groans  are 
far  less  objectionable  than  lifeless  formality.  They  practised 
upon  the  same  principle  adopted  by  the  General  Synod  of 
our  church,  that  God  is  a  God  of  order;  that  order  and  not 
confusion,  is  the  congenial  element  for  the  converting,  the 
regenerating  and  sanctifying  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

It  is  true,  they  never  called  out  awakened  sinners  before 
the  congregation,  to  be  made  the  subjects  of  special  prayer 


106    PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    L  IS  THE  R  AN  I  S  M. 

and  special  instruction,  except  on  confirmation  occasions. 
But  they  had  enjoyed  no  opportunity  to  witness  the  opera- 
tion  of  this  method,  except  in  connexion  with  noise  and 
confusion.  Whether,  if  they  were  now  living,  they  would 
do  it  i.s  uncertain.  Father  Muhlenberg  did,  what  resembles 
it.  He  conversed  individually  with  his  catechumens  during 
his  public  meetings  on  the  state  of  their  souls.  And  the 
Scriptures  seem  to  justify  some  method,  by  which  the  wil- 
ling convert  decides  on  the  spot,  whether  he  will  obey  or 
not.  Did  the  Saviour,  or  his  apostles  after  preaching,  leave 
the  place  without  ascertaining  who  were  willing  to  be  their 
followers  ?  Our  Saviour,  at  the  close  of  his  sermon,  (Matth. 
£.1.  28,)  said  to  the  weary  and  heavy  laden,  that  is  to  tba 
anxious  and  inquiring  souls,  "  Come  unto  me  and  I  will  give 
you  rest;"  but  he  did  not  say,  Come  to-morrow.  And  if 
they  came  to  him,  we  cannot  see  how  he  would  give  them 
rest,  except  by  further  instruction  and  advice  as  to  their  con- 
duct. We  have  so  long  been  accustomed  to  a  spiritual 
application  of  this  invitation  of  the  Saviour,  that  we  forget 
that  its  primitive  meaning  was  literal.  In  many  other  occa- 
sions, Jesus  exhorts  his  hearers  to  follow  him.  "Sell  that 
thou  hast  and  follow  me  " — "if  any  man  will  serve  me  let 
him  follow  me."  Acts  ii.  41.  After  Peter  had  preached 
at  Pentecost,  and  many  were  pricked  to  the  heart,  he  ex- 
horted them  to  be  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins.  We  arc 
told,  "Then  immediately  those  who  received  the  word 
gladly,  were  baptized,  being  about  three  thousand."  Now, 
how  did  the  apostle  know,  who  among  his  hearers  re- 
ceived the  word  gladly,  unless  he  gave  them  an  invitation 
to  manifest  it,  in  some  way  or  other  ?  And  how  could  he 
oaptize  them  unless  they  came  to  him  ?  Yet  this  was  done 
immediately  and  not  the  next  day. 

2.  The  establishment  of  prayer -meet' ngs  by  the  patriarchs 
of  our  American  church,  is  another  proof  of  their  friend- 
ship to  spiritual  religion  and  scriptural  religious  revivals. 
The  public  exercises  of  the  pulpit  are  such  plain  and  uni- 
versally conceded  duties  of  a  minister,  that  in  Protestant 
churches  all  practice  them.  Manifestations  of  zeal  in  the 
pulpit,  may  also  be  found  among  such  as  are  at  heart,  either 
hostile  ,or  at  least  indifferent  to  the  cause  of  true  piety. 
Animal  feeling,  and  the  desire  of  popularity  as  public  speak- 
ers, may  induce  some,  practising  on  the  well  known  rule  of 


PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN     LUTHER  AN  ISM.     107 

Horace,1  that  feeling  in  the  orator  is  essential  to  its  produc- 
tion in  the  hearer,  to  yield  themselves  to  the  impulses  of 
natural  feeling  and  thus  without  that  blamelessness  required 
by  Paul,  or  that  moral  virtue  which  both  Cicero  and  Quin- 
tilian  describe  as  essential  requisites  of  true  eloquence,  they 
may  pass  for  reputable  preachers.  But  when  we  see  the 
zealous  preacher,  also  zealous  in  sustaining  those  less  osten- 
tatious modes  of  worship,  and  means  of  doing  good,  we  have 
additional  reason  to  regard  him  as  one  of  those  who  watch 
for  souls,  as  those  that  must  give  an  account.  The  mere 
formalist  is  averse  to  genuine  religious  expitement,  because 
its  regulation  and  improvement,  make  demands  on  his  time 
and  exertions.  But  the  faithful  servant  of  Christ  rejoices  to 
witness  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  moving  the  hearts  of 
his  hearers,  and  is  ready  to  spend  and  be  spent,  in  the 
appropriate  labors  of  his  profession.  Such  was  the  charac- 
ter of  our  fathers.  They  introduced  prayer  ^meetings,  not 
merely  in  the  form  of  the  Collegia  pietatis,  to  which  they  had 
been  accustomed  in  Germany,  but  also  adopted,  what  to 
them  were  new  measures.  They  adapted  them  to  the 
necessities  of  their  people,  and  conducted  them  according  to 
the  customs  of  England  and  this  country.  Their  journal, 
published  at  Halle,  specifically  mentions  Muhlenberg,2  Brunn- 
holtz,  Krug,  Kunze,  Helmuth  and  others,  as  favoring  and 
holding  these  meetings,  and  we  have  no  reason  to  regard 
this  as  a  peculiarity  in  them..  They  allowed  laymen  to  hold 
these  meetings  alone  in  the  absence  of  the  pastor.. 

Like  Luther,  and  Knox,  and  Spener,  and  Franke,  and 
Wesley,  they  appear  to  have  been  eminently  men  of  prayer. 
We  would  look  in  vain,  even  amongst  the  most  zealous  min- 
isters of  any  denomination  at  the  present  day,  for  a  parallel 
to  some  of  their  specimens  of  abounding  prayer.  At  the 
consecration  of  St.  Michael's  church  in  this  city,  in  the  year 
1748,  after  the  name  of  Michael's  had  been  given  it.  the 
ministers  all  kneeled  around  the  altar,  and  there  were  not 
less  than  six  prayers  offered  up,  viz:  two  in  Swedish  by  Pro- 
vost Sandin  and  Rev.  Nusmazm,  and  four  in  German  by 
Rev.  Brunnholtz,  Hartwick,  Handschuh  and  Kurtz.3     And 


(1)  Si  vis  me  flere,  &c. 

(2)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  915,  917. 

(3)  Hallischc  Nachrichten,  p.  56& 


108     PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHER AN ISM. 

at  the  consecration  of  the  church  in  Germantown  in  1752, 
the  pious  Handschuh  remarks,  "  After  the  act  of  consecra- 
tion was  performed  by  the  Rev.  Acrelius,  of  the  Swedish 
Lutheran  church,  we  ministers  all  fell  upon  our  knees  around 
the  altar,  and  each  offered  up  a  prayer  according  to  the  cir- 
cumstances, in  the  following  order,  Muhlenberg,  Kurtz, 
Schaum,  Weygand,  Heinzelman,  Schultz,  Schrenk,  Raus, 
and  myself."1 

A  prayer-meeting  was  commenced  in  Philadelphia,  by 
Muhlenberg  himself,  who  had  held  them  daily  on  board  the 
ship,  crossing  the  Atlantic,2  and  continued  until  the  time  of 
Dr.  Helmuth.  Another  was  sustained  in  Lancaster,  con- 
ducted by  the  lay-members  alone,  of  which  the  pastor.  Dr. 
Helmuth,  gives  the  following  interesting  account:  "Those 
who  had  learned  to  know  the  truth,  meet  on  two  or  three 
evenings  of  the  week,  at  different  places  for  the  purpose  of 
singing,  praying,  reading  a  chapter  of  the  Bible,  and  also  of 
Arndt's  True  Christianity.  The  number  attending  was  often 
inconveniently  large,  amounting  to  from  thirty  to  forty. 
These  meetings  were  several  times  disturbed  by  wicked  men, 
both  young  and  old,  by  standing  around  the  windows  lis- 
tening, and  sometimes  by  casting  stones  against  the  doors  for 
the  purpose  of  exciting  those  within  to  resistance.  They  re- 
viled them  publicly  on  the  streets,  stigmatizing  them  as 
pietists,  hypocrites,  <fec. 

My  conduct,  adds  Dr.  Helmuth,  has  also  given  much 
offense,  in  as  much  as  I  would  not,  and  could  not  discourage 
such  meetings.  On  the  contrary,  I  loved  them,  and  praised 
them  both  publicly  and  privately,  with  suitable  caution  against 
their  abuse."3 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  those  among  us,  who  are  most 
zealously  engaged  in  promoting  prayer-meetings,  conducted 
in  christian  order,  are  the  genuine  old  school  Lutherans,  and 
if  necessary  we  can  plead  the  example  of  the  fathers  of  our 
church  in  our  defense. 

3.  Their  private  pastoral  labors  prove  them  to  have  been 
friends  of  spiritual  religion  and  of  religious  revival.  They 
seem  to  have  not  only  aimed  at  the  conversion  of  sinners,  in 


(1)  Pa*e2S5. 

(2)  Page  49. 

(3)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  1352. 


PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERAXISM.     109 

their  sermons  and  prayer-meetings,  but  they  also  faithfully 
followed  up  those  labors  by  more  private  efforts  with  indi- 
vidual souls.  Their  journal  abounds  in  detailed  narratives 
of  individual  cases  of  experience,  evincing  their  deep  solici- 
tude for  souls,  and  showing  that,  like  the  apostles,  ''they 
preached  privately  to  those  of  reputation,  lest  they  should 
have  run  and  labored  in  vain."1  Listen  to  an  extract  from 
Dr.  Muhlenberg's  diary,  taken  from  multitudes  almost  at  ran- 
dom.    May  27th,   1752:   "I  visited  Mr. ,  the  senior 

officer  of  the  government,  whom  I  mentioned  before.  He 
professed  to  have  been  greatly  encouraged  by  the  four  ser- 
mons I  had  preached  here.  We  had  an  edifying,  confidential 
conversation,  and  mutually  encouraged  each  other.  After- 
wards I  visited  a  young  deacon,  who  also  appeared,  to  be 
revived,  and  determined  to  give  his  whole  heart  to  God. 
Finally  I  visited  the  sick  woman  before  referred  to.  She 
thanked  me  heartily  that  I  had  spoken  to  her  concerning 
death.  She  had  subdued  all  fear  of  her  approaching  end, 
and  had  a  deep  sense  of  her  depravity,  and  a  godly  sorrow 
on  account  of  it.  She  felt  and  acknowledged  herself  the  very 
chief  of  sinners,  as  destitute  of  even  the  least  power  to  help 
herself.  But  although  her  heart  seemed  thus  bruised  and 
humbled,  she  could  not  yet  console  herself  by  the  merits  of 
the  Saviour.  At  her  request,  I  prayed  for  her,  and  spread 
her  wants  before  the  Lord,  and  instructed  her  from  the  word 
of  God."2 

Touching  a  visit  paid  by  him  to  the  congregation  in  Tul- 
pehocken,  he  bears  this  pleasing  testimony  of  the  fidelity 
and  success  of  his  fellow-laborer,  Rev.  N.  Kurtz.  "  After 
the  preaching  was  over,"  says  he,  "  I  was  informed  by  va- 
rious individuals,  that  they  had  been  awakened  from  the 
sleep  of  sin,  by  the  preaching  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Kurtz,  and 
brought  to  repentance,  and  a  hungering  and  thirsting  after 
righteousness."3 

One  other  case  I  cannot  omit.  It  is  from  the  journal  of 
that  venerable  father  in  Christ,  with  whom  in  early  life,  I 
had  yet  the  pleasure  of  personal  acquaintance  during  several 
years,  though  the  heat  and  burden  of  many  years  had  im-- 

(1)  Gal.  ii.  2. 

(2)  Hallische  Naclirichtea.  p.  4S9. 

(3)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  229, 

10 


110     PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM. 

paired  his  intellectual  as  well  as  his  bodily  energies.  "  To 
day,"  says  he,  "  I  visited  several  sick  persons,  among-  whom 
was  a  naturalist,  (deist.)  He  had  travelled  much  in  the 
world,  and  had  been  a  captain  in  the  Danish  army.  He 
urged  the  principal,  customary  objections  to  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  and  other  truths  of  the  gospel.  Grace  was  given 
me  to  reply  to  him  in  a  becoming-,  affectionate  and  convincing 
manner.  How  great  was  my  joy,  when,  in  the  midst  of  my 
conversation  with  him,  he  seized  my  hand,  and  with  tears  in 
his  eyes  exclaimed,  you  have  convinced  me,  dearest  friend, 
you  have  reclaimed  a  wandering  sheep  to  the  Great  Shep- 
herd !  He  then  uttered  a  heartfelt  prayer,  and  with  many 
tears  besought  the  Saviour  as  the  true  God-man,  and  Re- 
deemer of  the  world,  to  pardon  his  sins.  I  reminded  him 
of  the  Saviour's  declaration :  Whosoever  heareth  my  say- 
ings, &c.  I  told  him,  he  must  persevere  in  prayer,  through 
every  difficulty,  until  he  obtained  lasting  peace  of  mind."1 
This  convert  not  long  after  died  in  the  hopes  of  the  gospel, 
and  Dr.  Helmuth  took  occasion  to  add  interest  to  his  funeral 
discourse  by  a  narration  of  his  conversion,  a  practice,  which, 
if  judiciously  followed,  we  would  recommend  to  our  younger 
brethren  occasionally  to  pursue. 

Nor  were  their  self-denying  labors  at  all  confined  to  the  rich, 
or  those  in  middling  circumstances.  They  freely  "  conde- 
scended to  those  of  low  estate."  The  poor,  yea  those  who 
might  be  emphatically  styled  God's  poor,  for  they  are  des- 
pised by  many  for  the  skin  which  He  gave  them,  we  mean 
the  neglected  colored  population,  shared  in  their  faithful  la- 
bors. Under  date  of  February  15th,  1745,  he  states:  "I 
visited  a  female  of  the  Reformed  church,  who  seems  to  be 
truly  pious,  and  a  colored  woman,  a  slave,  (for  then,  alas  ! 
even  Pennsylvania  had  slaves  !)  entered  the  room,  who  ap- 
peared to  be  a  friend  of  true  religion,  and  to  possess  an  ex- 
perimental acquaintance  with  it.  I  conversed  with  her  in 
the  English  language,  in  order  to  encourage  her  mind."2 
On  another  occasion,  during  his  residence  in  the  city  of  New 
York,  he  says:  (July  26th,  1752.)  ''This  forenoon  I 
preached  in  Low-dutch  on  the  unjust  steward,  and  this  af- 
ternoon, in   German,  on  the  words,  "I  am  crucified  to  the 


(1)  Hallische  Nachrichten.  p.  1473. 

(2)  Hulluche  Nachrichtcn,  p.  49. 


PATRIARCHS     OF    AMERICAN     LUTHERANISM.      HI 

world,"  &c.  A  widow  of  the  congregation  had  a  mulatto 
slave,  who  was  in  the  habit  of  attending  our  English  and 
Low-dutch  meetings,  and  by  her  consistent  walk  put  many 
nominal  christians  to  shame.  She  brought  me  my  dinner 
from  her  mistress.  I  offered  her  a  piece  of  money  as  a  token 
of  my  gratitude,  but  she  absolutely  refused  to  take  it,  and 
began  to  weep  bitterly,  because  she  had  heard  that  I  was 
about  to  leave  them.  She  said,  she  had  experienced  the 
power  of  the  preached  word  in  her  heart,  and  had  never  be- 
fore obtained  so  much  consolation  for  her  soul,  and  now  I 
was  about  to  leave  them.  I  must  confess  my  heart  was  ready 
to  break.  I  admonished  her  to  adhere  closely  to  the  Lord 
Jesus,  who  shed  his  blood  for  her  too.  After  the  afternoon 
sermon,  three  inquiring  sinners  visited  me  in  my  house,  and 
desired  a  word  of  instruction.  At  night,  I  preached  in  the 
English  language  on  the  condition  of  the  church  at  Laodicea,1 
Rev.  3.  In  the  journal  of  the  Rev.  Handschuh,  also,  we 
find  six  or  eight  entries  detailing  his  faithful  labors  in  instruct- 
ing a  colored  man2  of  genuine  piety,  and  admitting  him  into 
the  church.  Noble  example  !  How  few  among  us  have 
done  likewise  !  Have  not  some  of  us  been  ashamed  of  the 
poor  negro  ?  Or  at  least,  have  we  not  neglected  him  ?  How 
few  of  us  have  remembered  them  that  are  in  bonds  as  bound 
with  them  ? 

They  discouraged  vice  in  every  form,  as  hostile  to  the  in- 
terests of  the  soul.  Has  the  cause  of  temperance  enlisted 
all  the  wise  and  good  of  our  age  ?  Here  we  find  temper- 
ance men  before  the  age  of  temperance;  men  who  dis- 
couraged all  use  of  ardent  spirits  a  century  ago.  Muhlen- 
berg describing  the  custom  which  even  at  this  day  disgraces 
some  enlightened  neighborhoods,  of  giving  intoxicating 
liquors  as  a  supposed  refreshment,  at  funerals  in  the  country, 
dilates  on  its  soul-destroying  effects,  and  praises  those  who 
gave  bread,  and  some  innocent  beverages  in  its  stead.  His 
description  of  rum,  then  a  novelty,  is  worthy  of  note.  He 
says  :  "  There  is  a  species  of  spirit  of  wine  in  this  country, 
which  is  distilled  from  the  West  India  sugar-cane.  It  pos- 
sesses a  concealed,  exciting,  deceptive,  and  corrupting  ten- 
dency, and  can  gradually  enslave  and  ruin  the  strongest 

(1)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  502. 

(2)  Page  564—570. 


112     PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM. 

constitution.  If  a  person  take  a  spoonful  to-day,  to-morrow 
his  nature  demands  two,  and  next  day  three,  and  thus  on 
until  he  acquires  such  a  thirst  for  strong  drinks,  that  he  can 
pour  in  the  strongest  brandy  like  water,  and  still  cannot  slake 
his  thirst.  It  may  well  be  compared  to  the  pestilence  that 
walketh  in  darkness,  and  the  destruction  that  rageth  at  noon- 
day, by  which  a  thousand  are  slain  on  our  side,  and  ten 
thousand  on  the  other.1'''  Yet  impartiality,  one  of  the  cardi- 
nal virtues  of  the  historian,  requires  us  to  add,  that  though 
a  temperance  man  in  the  literal  sense,  and  in  regard  to  rum 
a  total  abstinence  man,  the  grand  idea  of  the  present  age  of 
moral  reform,  total  abstinence  from  all  that  intoxicates, 
whether  vinous  or  distilled  liquors,  had  not  yet  dawned  on 
his  mind.  But  who  can  doubt  that  if  he  had  lived  in  our 
day,  he  would  be  found  in  the  foremost  ranks  of  thorough 
reformers  ? 

That  they  were  the  ardent  friends  of  genuine  religious 
revival,  is  doubly  evinced  by  the  manner  in  which  they  speak 
of  the  sjyecial  blessing,  sometimes  attendant  on  their  labors. 
Says  Dr.  Helmuth,  in  1772  :  "As  to  the  spiritual  condition 
of  our  church,  there  is  at  present  an  unusually  blessed  state 
of  revival.  Aged,  dead  sinners  have  been  brought  to  life, 
and  cried  out  weeping  for  mercy.  Sinners  whose  case  I  had 
often  regarded  as  hopeless,  are  powerfully  affected,  and  many 
of  them  truly  converted  to  Christ.  How  greatly  has  my 
despondent  mind  been  cheered,  and  my  sluggish  heart  been 
roused,  especially  during  the  past  weeks  !  I  published  a 
sacramental  season,  and  in  order  that  I  might  have  oppor- 
tunity to  probe  the  hearts  of  my  dear  people,  I  gave  them 
an  invitation  to  call  on  me  from  eight  to  twelve  o'clock,  A. 
M.,  every  day  for  two  weeks.  I  thus  had  an  opportunity  to 
converse  with  each  one  separately,  and  to  learn  the  extent 
and  depth  of  this  revival  in  many  souls,  by  which  the  labors 
of  these  fourteen  days  were  greatly  sweetened.  Through 
occasional  neglect  of  my  meals,  and  through  excess  of  speak- 
ing and  concern  of  mind,  I  was  very  much  debilitated  at  the 
end  of  this  time."2     This  same  father,  speaking  of  some 

(1)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  986.  See,  also,  p.  477.  and  on  p.  1196, 
the  case  of  an  intemperate  female  !  and  p.  1479,  a  case  of  delirium  tremens, 
the  subject  of  which  was  truly  converted  and  remained  faithful  at  least  to 
the  date  of  the  report  in  1784. 

(2)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  1344. 


PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM.     113 

catechumens,  who  were  deeply  impressed  during  his  address 
to  them,  says  :  "  Their  hearts  were  so  deeply  moved,  that 
they  could  not  contain  themselves,  nor  refrain  from  disturb- 
ing me  during  the  services  by  their  audible  weeping."    . 

Dr.  Kunze,  one  of  the  most  learned  and  enlightened  of 
that  noble  band,  thus  expresses  himself  in  1782:  ''Espe- 
cially," says  he,  "  among  the  young  in  this  place,  a  fire  has 
been  kindled,  which  to  the  mutual  joy  of  my  colleague,  Dr. 
Helmuth,  and  myself,  has  been  burning  upwards  of  a  year."1 
Speaking  of  New  York2  in  1785,  to  which  city  he  had  re- 
moved, he  says  :  "By  the  grace  of  God  my  labors  are  not 
in  vain.  The  number  of  souls  who  have  been  gained  by  the 
word,  is  not  yet  large.  Several  have,  however,  come  to  me 
with  tears,  and  expressed  a  desire  to  converse  with  me  about 
the  concerns  of  their  souls.  Of  more  extended  fruit,  I  have 
as  yet  heard  only  faint  indications ;  but  that  the  preaching 
of  the  word  has  somewhat  affected  the  souls  of  my  hearers 
in  general,  I  infer  from  evident  proofs  in  the  whole  congre- 
gation." 

4.  Their  conscientious  and  faithful  labors  to  train  the 
rising  generation  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord, 
proves  them  the  friends  of  genuine  religion,  and  of  reli- 
gious revivals.  One  of  the  cardinal  characteristics  of  the 
Lutheran  church,  has  always  been  her  systematic  provision 
for  the  thorough  religious  education  of  the  young.  In  no 
other  church  on  earth  are  the  children  more  fully  indoctrin- 
ated in  the  way  in  which  they  should  go.  Yet  the  value 
of  this  provision  depends  much  upon  the  manner  in  which 
it  is  executed,  and  this  depends  upon  the  piety  of  the  min- 
ister. It  is  therefore  not  the  mere  fact  that  catechetical 
instruction  was  given,  and  given  extensively ;  but  the  man- 
ner in  which  it  was  done,  to  which  we  appeal  in  proof  of 
our  theme.  These  fathers  gave  all  due  prominence  to  the 
practical  aspects  of  instruction.  They  labored  to  make  that 
instruction  the  means  of  conversion  to  those  on  whom  it 
was  bestowed.  So  that  at  the  great  day  they  might  be  able 
to  say,  "Here  Lord  am  I,  and  the  children  thou  hast  given 
me."  It  was  customary  for  them  to  preach  in  the  country 
stations  but  once  a  day,  and  immediately  alter  the  publis 

(1)  Hallische  Nachrichten,  p.  1423. 

(2)  Page  1509. 

10a 


114    PATRIARCHS    OF  AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM. 

service,  to  devote  an  hour  to  the  catechetical  instruction  of 
the  young.  But  their  diary  pays  the  special  tribute  to  the 
liev.  Van  Buskirk,  of  Macunschy,  that  he  possessed  partic- 
ular excellence  in  this  department.  Sometimes  they  cate- 
chised the  congregation  on  the  gospel  of  the  day.1  The 
common  book  of  instruction,  however,  was  ordinarily  Lu- 
ther's German  Catechism.  Of  this  valuable  little  manual,  an 
English  translation  of  it  was  made  at  a  very  early  period, 
for  we  find  that  version  of  Dr.  Wrangel,  in  1761,  is  called 
a  new  one.  Another  version  into  the  Indian  language  had 
been  executed  before  by  Campanius,  Lutheran  pastor  of  the 
Swedes.  It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  even  at  that  early 
day,  the  opposition  of  several  sects  to  this  important  method 
of  instruction  was  very  strong;  and  it  is  recorded  that  some 
of  their  enemies  termed  the  catechism  ''the  devil's  book."2 
No  well  grounded  objection,  however,  can  be  made  against 
the  fact  of  catechetical  instruction,  though  it  justly  may 
against  the  practice  of  some  negligent  pastors,  who  conduct 
their  instruction  in  a  careless  manner,  and  admit  their  cate- 
chumens to  sacramental  communion  without  the  requisite 
attainments  in  religious  experience.  Rightly  conducted,  the 
course  of  instruction  preparatory  to  sacramental  communion, 
ought  not  to  consist  mainly  in  reciting  or  explaining  the  cate- 
chism, which  should  be  done  in  earlier  years  ;  but  principally 
in  a  course  of  lectures  on  practical  piety,  based  on  the  cate- 
chism, explaining  the  rise,  progress,  nature,  evidences  of  true 
conversion,  and  the  duties  of  professed  disciples  of  Christ. 
Thus  conducted,  it  furnishes  to  the  pious  pastor,  a  series  of 
practical  meetings,  giving  him  free  access  to  the  hearts  of 
his  catechumens,  and  enabling  him  to  accomplish  all  that 
spiritual  good,  aimed  at  and  doubtless  often  attained  by 
others,  under  the  name  of  class  meetings  or  conference 
meetings,  &c.  After  many  years  of  experience  and  obser- 
vation, we  regard  this  peculiarity  of  the  Lutheran  church 
as  one  of  her  moral  glories ;  and  we  trust  no  Lutheran  min- 
ister wTill  be  found  disparaging  it.  But  we  will  let  these 
fathers  speak  for  themselves.  Says  Mr.  Brunholtz,  of  Phila- 
delphia, in  1752:  "I  find,  that  my  catechetical  instructions 
of  the  young,  which  I  have  from  the  beginning  conducted 

(1)  Hallische  Nacliricliten,  p.  927. 

(2)  Hallische  Nachrichtcn,  p.  289. 


PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHE  R  AN  ISM  .     115 

m  the  church,  (to  which  I  have  added  another  exclusively 
for  children,  on  Friday,  at  my  residence,)  has  excited  a 
greater  interest,  not  only  in  the  youth,  but  also  amongst 
others,  than  could  be  done  by  preaching  alone  ;  because 
the  people  are  better  able  to  understand  instruction  in  ques- 
tion and  answer,  than  a  didactic  discourse.  These  Sunday 
afternoon  exercises  are  almost  as  numerously  attended  as 
the  discourses  of  the  morning."1 

Of  the  faithful  manner  in  which  Muhlenberg  himself  con- 
ducted the  course  of  instruction,  preparatory  to  confirmation, 
let  us  hear  his  own  testimony.  "In  the  month  of  Novem- 
ber, I  confirmed  and  admitted  to  the  Lord's  supper,  the 
young  people  whom  I  had  instructed  in  New  Hanover. 
They  were  twenty-six  in -number,  chiefly  adults,  one  of 
whom  was  a  married  man.  They  had  committed  to  mem- 
ory the  questions  on  the  plan  of  salvation  with  considerable 
accuracy.  I  labored  earnestly  to  impress  them  with  the 
proper  import  of  what  they  had  learned,  and  without  ceas- 
ing admonished  them  to  frequent  prayer,  and  to  reduce  to 
practice  the  instructions  they  had  received.  They  cannot, 
therefore,  plead  as  an  excuse  before  God,  that  they  have 
not  been  sufficiently  impressed  and  urged.  The  major  part 
of  them  have  also  assured  me  in  the  individual  communi- 
cations I  had  with  them,  that  they  have  often  been  upon 
their  knees  in  private  prayer  at  home,  and  have  experienced 
in  their  souls  the  operative  influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God, 
through  his  word.  At  their  confirmation,  they  renewed 
their  baptismal  vows,  amid  many  tears,  upon  their  knees, 
before  God  and  the  congregation."2  Such  was  their  in- 
struction, and  thus  conducted  it  can  never  fail  to  eventuate 
in  blessing. 

5.  That  they  were  ardent  friends  of  spiritual  religion 
and  religious  revival  might  be  proved  by  the  various  ef- 
forts they  made  to  improve  the  state  of  discipline  in  their 
churches.  This  is  indeed  an  all-important  feature  of  a  well 
conducted  church.  Even  the  heathen  Seneca  has  said, 
bonis  nocet,  qui  mails  parcit,  and  a  greater  than  Seneca  has 
said,  "Them  that  sin,  rebuke  before  all,  that  others  may 
foar."     Our  Saviour  enjoins  that  after  having  admonished 


(1)  Hallisclie  Nachrichten,  p.  305. 

(2)  Hallisclie  Nachrichten,  p.  340. 


116    PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM. 

an  offending  brother  in  private,  the  admonition  should  be 
repeated  under  the  associate  influence  of  two  or  three  others. 
If  he  will  not  hear  them,  tell  it  to  the  church,  and  should 
he  still  refuse  to  hear,  then  esteem  him  as  a  heathen  or 
publican,  i.  e.  exclude  him  from  Christian  privileges.  It 
was  for  this  purpose  that  Christ  gave  his  disciples  the  keys 
of  the  kino-dom  of  heaven,  the  control  of  ingress  and  egress 
from  the  church,  and  told  them  that  whatsoever  they  bound 
on  earth,  should  be  bound  in  heaven,  and  whatsoever  they 
loosed  on  earth,  should  be  loosed  in  heaven.  Without  this 
provision  for  eclecticism  and  self-purification,  the  people  of 
God  would  not  be  "a  peculiar  people,"  nor  would  they 
long  continue  "zealous  of  good  works."  in  Germany,  as 
is  well  known,  the  unhappy  union  of  church  and  state  has 
entirely  defeated  all  efforts  of  discipline.  But  Muhlenberg 
and  his  coadjutors  saw  the  error,  and  determined  to  reform. 
They,  in  fact,  on  this,  as  on  some  other  points,  introduced  a 
neio  measure. 

In  1762,  a  system  of  church  discipline  was  introduced 
by  the  Philadelphia  church,  highly  respectable  in  the  stand- 
ard of  Christian  propriety  assumed.1  One  based  upon  simi- 
lar principles  was  adopted  by  the  church  in  Lancaster  ;  but 
Dr.  Helmuth,  at  that  time  pastor,  complains  in  1772,  of 
great  difficulty  in  enforcing  it.2 

In  1784,  it  was  resolved  at  a  synodical  meeting,  that  all 
communicants  who  had  been  guilty  of  licentiousness,  should 
be  required  to  make  public  confession  of  their  sin,  or  be 
excluded  from  church  privileges.3 

But  these  fathers  unhappily  failed  to  adopt  any  uniform, 
general  system,  based  upon  scriptural  principles.  Nor  did 
they  print  the  resolutions  actually  adopted,  for  general  cir- 
culation among  the  people.  Thus  they  lost  the  influence 
which  education  and  public  sanction  would  have  given  to 
the  discipline  they  actually  adopted,  and  ns  their  members 
had  never  been  accustomed  to  any  discipline  in  Germany, 
and  were,  therefore,  peculiarly  difficult  to  control,  the  dis- 
cipline was  soon  partially  relaxed,  and  in  course  of  time 
almost  totally  neglected. 


(1)  Hallkche  Nachricliten,  p.  963. 

(2)  Pa-e  1345. 

(3)  Page  1458. 


PATRIARCHS    OF   AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM.     117 

6.  Finally,  their  synodical  meetings  and  special  confer- 
ences were  conducted  in  such  a  manner,  as  to  prove  them 
the  ardent  friends  of  spiritual  religion,  and  of  religious  re- 
vival. The  light  in  which  they  viewed  these  meetings,  is 
indicated  by  the  minute  made  of  one  of  them  in  1760,  after 
the  discussion  of  the  question,  whether  it  is  useful  and  ne- 
cessary that  the  annual  meetings  of  the  ministers  and  elders 
should  be  continued.  "  It  is  necessary  (say  they,)  in  order 
that  the  servants  of  one  master  and  laborers  in  one  vine- 
yard, may  become  acquainted  with  each  other,  may  become 
more  closely  united  in  love,  and  in  mutual  consultation  con- 
cerning the  best  interests  of  the  church  (ecclesiae  plantan- 
dae,)  and  the  propagation  of  the  Christian  religion.  They 
are  useful,  in  order  that  each  individual  may  communicate 
the  grace  and  gift  he  has  received,  for  the  common  good, — 
that  they  may  encourage,  admonish,  and  comfort  each  other, 
and  decide  cases  of  conscience, — that  they  may  make  known 
to  each  other  in  love,  simplicity,  meekness,  and  humility, 
their  personal  faults  of  which  they  themselves  might  not  be 
aware, — and  remove  all  contention  and  jealousy ;  because 
a  house  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand,  and  harmony 
among  ministers  of  the  same  denomination,  (and  we  would 
add,  of  all  fundamentally  orthodox  churches,)  ''makes  a 
great  impression  upon  friends  and  foes."  J 

The  zeal  and  brotherly  love  actually  abounding  among 
them,  was  such,  that,  during  the  meeting  above  referred  to, 
whilst  they  regularly  dismissed  the  congregation  at  a  sea- 
sonable hour  and  retired  to  the  residence  of  Dr.  Muhlen- 
berg, there  to  spend  some  time  in  private  conference  on 
experimental  religion  and  the  duties  and  difficulties  of  the 
pastoral  office,  they  thrice  continued  these  private  consulta- 
tions and  devotional  exercises  till  long  after  midnight,  viz. : 
on  the  18th,  19th  and  20th  of  October,  1760.2 

As  early  as  1772,  the  practice  of  holding  special  confer- 
ences, in  the  interim  of  the  synodical  meetings,  was  com- 
menced, and  their  design  is  thus  described  by  Dr.  Helmuth  : 
"A  conference  is  to  be  held  once  every  three  months,  to  be 
attended  only  by  those  ministers  who  reside  nearest  to- 
gether, and  they  differ  from  the  General  Conference  (the 

(1)  Hallisclie  Nachrichten,  p.  857. 

(2)  Pages  654,  855—862. 


118     PATRIARCHS    OF    AMERICAN    LUTHERAKISM. 

Synod, )  in  this,  that  their  object  is  not  to  attend  so-  much 
to  the  external  affairs  of  the  congregation,  but  chiefly  to 
aim  at  edification  and  at  improvement  in  brotherly  love. 
The  contiguous  brethren  in  the  upper  part  of  Pennsylvania, 
(Lancaster,)  are  Messrs.  Kurtz,  tSen'r.,  Kurtz,  Jr.,  Krug, 
Wildbahn,  Enderlein,  Fred.  Muhlenberg  and  myself  (Hel- 
imith.)  We  held  our  first  meeting  in  a  village,  called  New 
Holland,  and  spent  our  time  in  a  truly  brotherly  manner. 
Each  brother  proposed  something,  which  tended  to  edifica- 
tion or  instruction,  and  which  was  made  the  subject  of 
prayer."  ' 

How  pleasing  to  find  one  of  the  most  important  measures 
for  promoting  religion,  which  is  but  now  beginning  to  gain 
currency  amongst  us,  we  mean  special  conferences,  sanc- 
tioned by  something  so  much  like  them,  in  the  practice  of 
the  illustrious  pioneers  and  fathers  of  our  church  !  Would 
that  the  provisions  of  our  Formula  on  this  subject  were 
more  generally  reduced  to  practice.  Then  should  we  wit- 
ness more  frequent  revivals  of  religion  amongst  us,  and  see 
spiritual  religion  more  extensively  prevail. 

In  conclusion,  we  see  that  the  spirit  of  our  Fathers  was 
a  spirit  of  Eclecticism.  They  called  no  man  master,  they 
acknowledged  no  head  but  Christ ;  no  absolute  authority 
but  the  Bible.  They  bound  themselves  to  no  set  of  forms 
'derived  from  the  old  country,  but  retaining  the  grand  land- 
marks of  Lutheranism,  doctrinal,  practical,  and  liturgical, 
they  adapted  them  to  their  altered  circumstances  in  this 
country.  Thus  with  the  Bible  in  their  hands,  and  their  eyes 
fixed  on  the  leadings  of  God's  providence,  they  passed  for- 
ward, and  felt  at  liberty  to  adopt  any  improvement  which 
was  developed  in  the  progress  of  society,  and  of  the  church, 
and  which  commended  itself  to  reason  and  to  scripture. 
|  Thus  0  may  it  ever  be  with  our  Zion  !  Far  be  the  time, 
nay,  may  it  never  come,  when  the  Lutheran  church  shall 
be  robbed  of  her  liberty  for  free  and  unshackled  investiga- 
tion, or  shall  again  be  enslaved  to  voluminous  creeds  and 
detailed  confessions.  But  with  the  Bible,  and  the  brief 
doctrinal  articles  of  the  Augsburg  confession,  may  that 
church,  which  is  emphatically  styled  the  church  of  the  Re^ 
formation,  continue  to  deserve  the  name,  and  as  she  owes 

(1)  HallisclieNachrichten,  p.  1339. 


PATRIARCHS    OF   AMERICAN    LUTHERANISM.    119 

her  existence  to  the  Reformation,  never  be  the  enemy  of 
Reformation.  For  the  sake  of  substantial  uniformity,  let 
her  have  a  brief  liturgy,,  but  never,  never,  bind  the  con- 
science of  her  ministers  as  to  the  frequency  of  its  use.  Let 
her  be  cautious  in  rejecting  the  old,  but  not  prejudiced 
against  all  that  is  new.  Let  her  try  every  doctrine  and 
every  measure  by  the  touchstone  of  God's  word,  and  what- 
ever the  oracles  of  Jehovah  sanction,  and  the  providence 
of  God  blesses,  let  her  not  be  ashamed  to  practice  and 
profess. 

Then,  my  beloved  brethren,  may  we  hope  to  find  our 
church  ever  the  friend  of  spiritual  religion  and  religious  re- 
vival;  then  may  Ave  hope  to  train  up  Christians  and  Chris- 
tian ministers  of  enlarged  views,  of  liberal,  charitable  feel- 
ings, of  expanded  enterprises,  of  millenial  schemes.  Thus 
may  we  hope  she  will  co-operate  most  harmoniously,  and 
most  efficiently  with  the  other  churches  of  our  land,  and  of 
all  lands,  in  advancing  the  mediatorial  reign  of  our  blessed 
Master,  and  preparing  the  way  for  the  second  glorious  com- 
ing of  the  Lord. 


IV.    DISCOURSE. 

THE   NATURE  OF  THE    SAVIOUR'S  PRESENCE  IN  THE 
EUCHARIST. 


When  the  Divine  Author  of  our  holy  religion,  gave  us  an 
inspired,  written  record  of  its  sacred  principles,  precepts  and 
institutions,  through  the  men  whom  he  had  personally  in- 
structed, he  also  taught  us  to  regard  this  record  as  a  sufficient 
rule  of  faith  and  practice,  as  able  to  make  us,  individually, 
"wise  unto  salvation."  Through  these  same  honored  instru- 
ments he  informs  us,  "that  all  scripture  was  given  by  inspira- 
tion," for  the  express  purpose,  "  that  the  man  of  God  may  be 
perfect,  thoroughly  furnished  unto  every  good  work."  To 
the  close  of  the  whole  canon,  that  is,  to  the  last  (as  we  be- 
lieve) of  the  inspired  books,  the  Revelation  of  St.  John,  the 
Saviour  appended  this  solemn  warning,  speaking  in  his  own 
person:  "I  Jesus  have  sent  mine  angel  to  testify  unto  you 
these  things  in  the  churches.  If  any  man  shall  add  unto  these 
things,  God  will  add  unto  him  the  plagues  that  are  written  in 
this  book  ;  and  if  any  man  shall  take  away  from  the  words  of 
the  book  of  this  prophecy,  God  shall  take  away  his  part  out  of 
the  tree  (var.  lect.  for  Bi/3Xioj  book)  of  life,  and  out  of  the 
holy  city,  and  from  the  things  which  are  written  in  this 
book."     Rev.  xxii.  18,  19. 

From  these  solemn  declarations  it  is  evident,  that  God 
will  hold  every  man  to  strict  responsibility  for  the  conformity 
of  his  religious  opinions  to  the  teachings  of  the  inspired 
word ;  and,  therefore,  in  forming  our  doctrinal  views,  we 
ought  to  study  the  utmost  possible  objectivity,  ought  to  labor 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  121 

to  divest  ourselves  of  all  preconceived  opinions,  either  for 
one  or  other  interpretation  of  a  disputed  point,  and  let  the 
Scripture,  as  much  as  possible,  be  made  to  interpret  itself. 
These  remarks  are  peculiarly  applicable  to  the  doctrine  which 
is  at  present  to  claim  our  attention.  It  has  been  a  bone  of 
contention  in  the  Protestant  church,  with  but  little  inter- 
mission, ever  since  its  origin,  until  about  fifty  years  ago, 
when  the  Lutheran  church  almost  universally  abandoned 
the  views,  which  Luther  and  his  co-laborers,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, entertained.  We,  therefore,  feel  the  deepest  ob- 
ligation, in  endeavoring  to  investigate  this  subject,  to  be  gov- 
erned entirely  by  the  word  of  God,  interpreted  according  to 
the  correct  principles  of  common  sense,  which  is  the  only 
true  system  of  Historical  Exegesis. 

Let  us  first  briefly  recall  to  mind  those  principles  of  Her- 
meneutics,  which  particularly  come  into  question  in  these 
passages  of  Scripture  on  this  subject. 

§  1.     General  Principles  of  Interpretation. 

1.  The  general  nature  of  language  implies,  that  the  words 
of  a  speaker  be  regarded  as  delinite  signs  of  his  ideas,  and 
that  the  signification  of  these  signs  is  conventional :  that  is, 
the  signs  or  sounds  called  words,  derive  their  meaning,  not 
from  their  intrinsic  structure,  but  from  the  current  practice 
or  usage  of  the  people  at  the  time  they  are  employed-.  Thus, 
2w/xa  signifies  body,  Capf  flesh,  and  aijxa  blood,  SLprog  bread, 
and  ohog  wine,  simply  in  consequence  of  conventional  usage. 
The  few  words  in  different  languages,  which  express  sounds 
not  unlike  that  of  the  words  themselves,  such  as  roar,  crash, 
&c,  are,  like  some  of  the  admired  lines  of  Virgil  or  Homer, 
in  which  the  sounds  of  the  whole  sentence  bears  some  anal- 
ogy to  the  idea  expressed,  but  exceptions  which  confirm  the 
general  rule. 

2.  The  language  of  Scripture  and  of  inspiration,  does  not 
differ  from  other  language  in  its  general  principles.  That 
this  would  be  the  case,  might  a  priori  be  expected  :  for  if  it 
were  otherwise,  such  language  would  not  be  intelligible.  As 
words  in  any  language  convey  to  the  hearer,  not  whatever 
ideas  the  speaker  may  choose,  but  those  of  which  conven- 
tional usage  has  made  them  the  authorized  exponents  ;  the 
inspired  writers  could  be  intelligible  on  no  other  supposition. 


122      THE  NATURE  OF  THE  SAVIOUR'S 

Accordingly,  it  is  admitted  by  all  enlightened  exegetical 
writers,  that  the  language  of  Scripture  must  be  investigated 
on  precisely  the  same  principles  which  are  applied  to  unin- 
spired language. 

The  actual  examination  of  the  Scriptures  a  posteriori, 
proves  the  above  expectation,  or  supposition  to  be  correct. 
The  diversity  of  style,  of  literary  excellence,  and  of  psycho- 
logical peculiarity,  belonging  to  the  different  books,  incon- 
testably  establishes  the  homogeneity  of  the  language  of  the 
Bible,  with  that  of  uninspired  writers.  Generally,  the  Scrip- 
tures have  been  interpreted  on  this  supposition,  by  the  great 
mass  of  christians  in  all  ao;es,  and  found  to  be  intelligible. 

3.  The  rules  of  Sacred  Hermeneutics  must  therefore, 
also,  like  those  of  Hermeneutics  in  general,  be  based  on 
the  nature  and  general  principles  of  language,  and  arise  out 
of  them. 

Thus  we  must  study  the  historical  import  of  the  individual 
words  employed  :  the  context  and  scope  of  the  passage  must 
be  investigated,  the  circumstances  and  design  of  the  writer 
are  to  be  examined,  and  in  short  all  the  light  of  archaeology 
is  to  be  employed,  to  ascertain  what  ideas  the  passage  in 
question  would  have  conveyed  to  the  persons  of  the  age  and 
country,  to  whom  they  were  first  addressed.  The  sense  thus 
acquired  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  true  one,  and  is  termed 
the  historical  sense.  Luther  himself,  in  most  instances,  prac- 
ticed on  this  system,  and  termed  the  signification  thus  ac- 
quired the  literal  sense. 

4.  Experience,  however,  proves,  that  in  fact,  general  usage 
has,  in  all  languages,  given  different  significations  to  many 
words.  The  causes  of  this  fact,  we  will  not  here  stop  to 
discuss ;  its  reality  is  undisputed,  and  familiar  to  all. 

That  signification  of  a  word,  in  which  it  is  most  commonly 
employed,  is  usually  termed  its  natural  or  literal  import. 
The  others  are  called  figurative. 

The  figurative  meanings  of  words  are  of  various  kinds, 
metaphysical,  typical,  allegorical,  &c,  &c. 

5.  Yet  the  great  mass  of  men  ordinarily  employ  words,  in 
their  natural,  most  obvious,  and  literal  sense. 

Therefore,  a  sound  rule  of  interpretation  is,  that  the  literal 
sense  must  be  adhered  to  in  the  interpretation  of  all  authors, 
sacred  or  2?rofane,  until  reasons  occur  to  justify  us  in  devia- 
ting from  it. 


PRESENCE     IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  123 

6.  Such  reasons,  however,  often  do  occur  both  in  sacred 
and  profane  authors,  and  then  a  deviation  from  the  literal 
sense  becomes  necessary. 

These  reasons  are  1.)  When  the  passage  literally  inter- 
preted contradicts  natural  reason,  common  sense,  or  the  testi- 
mony of  our  senses. 

Thus,  for  example,  in  Psalm  xviii.  2,  and  elsewhere,  God 
is  termed  "a  rock,  &  fortress,  a  buckler,  a  high  tower:" 
when  the  Saviour  says,  (John  xv.  1,)  "I  am  the  true  vine, 
ye  are  the  branches," — or  "I  am  the  door,"  x.  9  :  or  when 
Paul  says,  1  Cor.  x.  4,  "  That  rock  was  Christ,"  or  "  Christ 
our  passover,"  was  slain  for  us,  &c. ;  or  Matth.  xiii.  38,  39, 
"  The  field  is  the  world — the  seed  is  the  word,  <fcc>,  the  enemy 
is  the  devil."  See  also  Matth.  viii.  22  ;  or  in  Gethsemane 
when  Jesus  says,  "Father,  if  it  be  possible  let  this  cup" 
this  trial  of  affliction,  pass  away.  This  rule  is  based  on  the 
universally  conceded  proposition,  that  the  testimony  of  our 
senses  fairly  and  fully  ascertained,  is  stronger  than  any  other 
evidence,  which  might  seem  to  overturn  it ;  and  that  the 
obvious  and  conceded  teachings  of  common  sense  and  rea- 
son are  also  true. 

2)  We  must  depart  from  the  literal  sense,  when  the  pas- 
sage literally  interpreted,  contradicts  the  iccll  known  opinions 
of  the  author,  or  in  regard  to  the  Bible,  contradicts  some 
other  portions  of  Scripture,  and  the  passage  naturally,  in 
accordance  with  the  laws  of  language,  admits  another 
meaning,  that  does  not  labor  under  these  difficulties.  Thus, 
the  command  of  the  Saviour:  "If  thy  hand,  or  foot,  or  eye 
offend  thee,  cut  it  off,  or  pluck  it  out,"  &c,  Matth.  xviii.  9, 
10,  literally  interpreted  contradicts  the  command  in  the 
decalogue,  "thou  shalt  not  kill,"  and,  therefore,  the  literal 
sense  cannot  be  retained. 

3)  The  deviation  from  the  literal  sense  is  the  more  nat- 
ural and  allowable,  when  the  composition  is  poetic,  in  which 
figurative  language  naturally  abounds,  in  all  languages  and 
among  all  nations. 

4)  Also,  in  popular  discourses  and  even  narrative  com- 
positions, when  the  speaker  is  in  the  habit  of  employing 
figurative  style. 

Thus,  after  we  know  from  the  discourses  of  the  Saviour 
in  general,  that  often,  very  often,  he  speaks  in  parables, 
and  employs  various  kinds  of  figurative  expressions ;  it  is 


124  THE   NATURE    OF  THE    SAVIOUR'S 

the  more  probable,  that  his  meaning  in  a  disputed  passage 
is  figurative  also  ;  and  it  is  the  more  obligatory  on  us  to 
adopt  a  tropical  interpretation,  when  a  literal  one  labors 
under  difficulties.  We  need  not  enumerate  the  parables  of 
the  Saviour.  It  is  well  known  that  his  discourses  are  more 
frequently  parabolical  or  figurative,  in  some  form  or  other, 
than  literal. 

This  is  also  very  frequently  the  case  in  regular  historical 
and  didactic  composition  in  all  languages,  although  the 
figures  occurring  are  of  a  more  modest  nature,  are  meta- 
phorical rather  than  allegorical.  The  tropes  are  rarely 
kept  up  through  a  whole  narrative. 

Such  a  figurative  mode  of  speaking,  is  more  usual  among 
the  orientals  in  general,  than  among  the  other  civilized 
nations. 

Having  thus  sketched  out  the  general  principles  of  her- 
meneutics,  so  far  as  they  have  an  immediate  bearing  on  the 
portions  of  Holy  Writ,  relating  to  the  Supper  of  our  Lord ; 
we  proceed,  in  the  second  place,  to  their  application.  We 
shall  inquire  what  is  the  literal  import  of  the  words  of  the 
institution;  whether  sufficient  difficulties  oppress  the  literal 
sense  to  justify  its  rejection ;  what  are  the  several  tropical 
or  figurative  significations,  of  which  the  words  in  question 
admit ;  and  which  of  these  commends  itself  most  strongly 
to  our  judgment  and  conscience,  as  most  accordant  with  the 
legitimate  principles  of  interpretation. 

§  2.  The  literal  sense  of  the  words  of  the  institution. 

What  is  the  literal  sense  of  the  Gospel  narrative  of  the 
institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper?  Matth.  xxvi.  26.  (Mark 
xiv.  22.     Luke  xxii.   19.     1  Cor.  xi.  23,  24.) 

Etfdjovrwv  ds  aurwv,  Xa/3wv  6  I^cfeg'  <rov  aprov,  xoa  Sj\oyrt(fagt 
(or  according  to  a  various  reading,  sv^api^rr^ag-J  sxXatfs, 
xai  kSids  tojs"  laadrj-rajiT ,  xai  sirs-  Aafisrs,  ^a^srs-  <nj-ro  k^i 
g-^fxa  fjos.  Literally,  this  means,  "But  whilst  they  were 
eating,  Jesus  took  the  bread,  (or  loaf,)  and  having  offered 
prayer,  or  pronounced  a  blessing,  (but  not  blessed  it,  the 
bread,  "it"  not  being  found  in  the  Greek,)  he  break  and 
gave  to  his  disciples,  and  said,  Take  eat,  this  (bread)  is  my 
body  (that  is,  is  no  longer  bread,  but  is  my  body,  and  hav- 
ing been  bread  when  I  took  it  up,  and  being  now  my  body, 


PRESENCE   IN   THE  EUCHARIST.  125 

it  must  have  been  changed  from  one  substance  into  another, 
that  is,  it  must  have  been  transubstantiated.")  We,  there- 
fore, see  that  the  Romish  doctrine  is  really  the  literal,  and 
only  literal  one.  And  it  cannot  be  consistently  denied,  that 
if  we  are  to  disregard  the  testimony  of  the  senses,  and  to 
suppose  a  miracle  in  the  case,  the  doctrine  of  papal  tran- 
substantiation  is  the  legitimate  sense  of  this  passage. 

The  same  remarks  and  inferences  are  equally  appropriate 
to  the  language  of  the  Saviour  touching  the  wine,  as  given 
by  Matthew  xxvi.  27-29.  TLIsts  i%  aurou  tfavrgg"  <rzro  ya? 
kg'u  <ro  a/jaa  fxov,  &c.  That  is,  literally,  Drink  ye  all  of  it, 
(out  of  this  cup,)  for  this  (boivl  or  cup)  is  (no  longer  a  cup, 
but)  is  my  blood.  Hence,  as  it  was  a  bowl  or  cup  when  he 
took  it  into  his  hands,  and  was  thereafter  no  longer  a  cup, 
but  was  his  blood,  it  must  have  been  changed  from  one 
substance  into  another :  and  here  again  we  have  the  papal 
transubstantiation  as  the  legitimate  and  only  result  of  the 
literal  interpretation.  Yet,  after  all,  even  the  Papists  do 
not  adhere  faithfully  to  the  literal  import  here,  as  they  sup- 
pose the  "cup"  (-TroT^piov)  to  be  used  figuratively  for  the 
wine  contained  in  it. 

This  Romish  interpretation  is  wisely  rejected  by  the 
whole  Protestant  world,  for  the  following  satisfactory 
reasons  : 

a)  It  is  contradicted  by  the  clear  and  indisputable  testi- 
mony of  our  senses,  which  demonstrate  that  no  change  has 
taken  place  in  the  nature  and  properties  of  the  bread  and 
wine.  We  have  this  testimony,  not  of  our  senses  only,  but 
of  sight,  taste,  smell  and  touch.  Nor  the  four  senses  of 
one  individual  onty,  but  of  all  men,  of  every  generation 
and  country,  where  the  rite  has  been  celebrated.  But  no 
testimony  is  so  strong  as  that  of  the  senses ;  because,  on  it 
rests  our  belief  even  of  the  Scriptures. 

b)  It  contradicts  the  universal  observation  of  mankind, 
that  all  bodies  (material  substances)  must  occupy  definite 
portions  of  space,  and  cannot  be  at  more  than  one  place  at 
one  time :  for  according  to  this  interpretation,  every  portion 
of  consecrated  bread  is  really  the  whole  material  body  of 
the  Saviour ;  hence  the  whole  body  is  locally  present  ia 
many  different  places  at  the  same  time,  which  is  absurd. 

c)  The  Apostle  still  calls  the  symbols  bread  and  wine, 
after  their  consecration ;  which  he  would  not  have  done,  if 

1U 


126  THE    NATURE    OF    THE    SAVIOUR'S 

they  had  been  transmuted  into  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Saviour.     1  Cor.  x.  16;  xi.  26. 

d)  Because  the  bread  and  wine  are  subject  to  the  same 
law  of  decomposition  and  corruption  as  if  they  were  not 
consecrated. 

e)  Because  it  was  a  comparatively  recent  doctrine,  un- 
known in  the  Christian  church  generally,  until  about  a  thou- 
sand years  after  this  ordinance  was  instituted.1 

§  3.  The  fhist  figurative  interpretation  (by  Luther.) 

What  is  the  first  figurative  interpretation  of  the  words  o'f 
the  Institution  ? 

It  is  that  of  Luther,  and  his  coadjutors  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  retained  by  the  great  mass  of  the  Lutheran  church 
till  half  a  century  ago,  from  some  apparent  scriptural  au- 
thority aided  by  respect  for  Luther,  and  the  penalties  which 
followed  the  rejection  of  a  material  feature  of  the  state  re- 
ligion. It  amounts  to  this :  The  words  of  the  Saviour, 
"Take,  eat,  <rs<ro  ig-i  <ro  (fupx  fjuj,"  (take,  eat,  this  is  my 
body,)  mean,  "Take,  eat  this  bread,  which  is  not  my  body, 
arid  remains  bread,  but  which  is  the  outward  element,  in,  with 
or  under  which  my  true  body  is  truly  and  substantially  pre- 
seitt,  and  is  distributed  with  the  bread,  and  received  by  the 
mouth,  by  all  communicants"2 

(1)  Sec  the  writer's  Popular  Theology,  5th  edit.  p.  296,  &c. 

(2)  That  there  may  he  no  doubt  in  the  rftinds  of  those  unacquainted 
with  the  symbolical  books,  as  to  the  accuracy  of  our  representation  of  the 
views  taught  in  them  on  the  subject  of  the  real  presence,  we  annex  several 
proof  passages  : 

1)  The  Augsburg  Confession  says  (Art.  X.)  :  "  The  true  (wahre,)  or 
real  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  verily  (.assuredly,  truly,  "  wahrhaftig- 
lich)  present,  and  distributed  and  received  by  the  communicants,  &c. 

2)  The  Apology  to  the  Confession,  Art.  X.  states  :  »•  The  tenth  Article 
(of  the  Augsb.  Conf.)  is  not  objected  to  by  our  opponents,  (the  Romanists) 
in  which  we  confess  that  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  are  truly  and 
substantially  (vere  et  substantialiter)  present,  and  tendered,  and  received, 
as  the  (Romish)  church  has  hitherto  believed  (wie  man  bis  auher  in  der 
Kirchen  gehalten  hat".)  That  is,  the  Augsburg  Confession  was  intended 
by  Mclancthon,  who  wrote  it,  and  was  understood  by  those  who  receive  it, 
to  teach  the  actual  presence  of  the  real  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  in  the 
sense  in  which  it  had  been  taught  by  the  Itomish  church  generally,  and 
also  by  the  Greeks,  who  are  named  in  the  context,  and  also  believed  in 
transubstantiation. 

«3)  The  Form  of  Concord,  Pars.  I.  §  VII.  De  Cama  Domini,  employs 
the  following  language,  affirming  that  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are 


PRESENCE  IN  THE  EUCHARIST.        127 

The  language  of  Jesus  relative  to  the  wine,  "Drink  ye 
all  out  of  it,"  (the  cup,)  rsro  yap  etfrj  to  ai,aa  fxx,  &c.  (for 
this  is  my  blood,)  is  to  be  thus  interpreted :  "Drink  ye  all 
of  this  wine,  which  is  not  my  blood,  and  remains  wine,  but 
which  is  the  outward  element,  in,  with,  or  under  which  my 
true  blood  is  truly  and  substantially  present,  and  is  distributed 
with  the  wine,  and  is  received  by  the  mouth  by  all  communi- 
cants" 

The  objections  to  this  interpretation,  are  very  similar  to 
those  which  oppress  the  Romish  doctrine  of  transubstantia- 
tion,  though  not  quite  as  strong. 

a)  It  contradicts  the  clear  and  indisputable  testimony  of 
our  senses.  This  theory  requires  us  to  believe,  not  as  the 
Papists  do,  that  the  bread  ceases  to  be  bread,  and  has  been 
transmuted  into  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour;  but, 
still,  that  the  true  body  of  Christ  is  actually  and  substan- 
tially, or  as  the  German  copy  says,  essentially  present,  and 
yet  it  cannot  be  perceived  by  our  senses.  The  body  of 
Christ,  whilst  on  earth,  was  always  perceptible  by  the 
senses,  like  other  bodies :  and  even  after  his  resurrection 
and  glorification,   whenever  he  was  present  at  any  place, 

truly  and  substantially  (or,  as  the  German  copy  states,  essentially)  pre- 
sent :  "  Quscritur  an  in  sacra  Ctrna,  verum  corpus  et  verus  sanguis  Domini 
nostri  Jesu  Christi  vere  et  substantialiter  sint  presentia,  atque  cum  pane 
etvino  distribuantur  et  ore  sumantur  ab  omnibus  illis  qui  hoc  sacramentum 
utuntur — Cingliani  negant — nos  vero  asseveramus."  "Ob  in  dem  Heili- 
gen  Abendmahl,  der  wahrhaftige  Leib  nnd  Blut  unseres  Herrn  Jesu  Christi 
wahrhaftiy  und  loesentlieh  gegenwartig  sei,  mit  Brodt  und  Wein  ausge- 
theilt.  und  mit  dem  Munde  empfangen  werde,  von  alien  so  sich  dieses  Sac- 
raments gebrauchen.     Die  Sacramentirer  sagen  nein,  wir  say  en  ja." 

We  are  aware,  that  the  Form  of  Concord  rejects  the  idea  of  a  gross  Ca- 
pernaitish  eating  and  drinking  in  the  eucharist,  according  to  which  the 
flesh  of  the  Redeemer  is  manducated  by  the  teeth,  and  digested  like  other 
food.  Muller  Symb.  Books,  p.  543.  It  would  therefore  be  the  height  of 
injustice  to  charge  the  adherents  of  the  symbols  with  believing  these  con- 
sequences. Yet.  if  they  properly  flow  from  their  doctrines,,  they  may  justly 
be  alleged  as  objections  to  the  doctrine  itself,  by  all  who  regard  them  aa 
its  legitimate  consequences. 

They  further  pronounce  the  mode  of  eating  and  drinking  to  be  a  "  spir- 
itical"  one.  to  which,  in  its  natural  import,  we  ourselves  believe;  but  they 
also  add,  "  we  believe  that  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  received  not 
only  spiritually  by  faith,  but  also  by  the  mouth,"  and  those  are  condemned 
who  affirm  that  this  reception  is  'only  spiritual  by  faith."  and  not  oral. 
The  symbolical  books  also  claim  for  the  glorified  body  of  Christ,  by  virtue 
especially  of  the  hypostatic  union,  the  possession  of  properties  different 
from  those  of  other  matter,  and  even  of  other  glorified  bodies.     Yet,  aa 


128    the  Mature  of  the  saviour's 

his  glorified  body  also  was  perceptible,  even  the  nail  prints 
in  his  hands  and  the  wounds  in  his  side.  This  glorified 
body,  like  that  of  believers  in  general,  will  still  be  a  body, 
however  elevated  and  refined  in  its  properties  ;  and  being  a 
body,  it  remains  matter,  and  like  all  human  bodies,  visible 
and  tangible. 

It  cannot  indeed  be  denied,  that  God,  by  a  miracle,  might 
so  interpose  as  to  make  the  body  of  the  Saviour  invisible 
on  sacramental  occasions ;  but  where  is  the  intimation  in 
any  part  of  the  narrative,  that  there  should  be  a  miracle 
wrought  ?  Or  is  there  the  least  shadow  of  evidence,  that 
the  apostles  thought  any  thing  miraculous  had  occurred  ? 
Do  they  manifest  any  surprise  ?  Certainly  not,  and  we 
have,  therefore,  no  authority  to  suppose  the  existence  of  a 
miracle. 

b)  It  also  contradicts  the  observation  of  all  ages  and 
nations,  that  every  body,  or  that  material  substance  must 
occupy  a  definite  portion  of  space  ;  and  cannot  be  at  more 
than  one  place  at  the  same  time.  According  to  this  view, 
the  body  of  Christ  must  be  able  to  occupy  different  portions 
of  space  at  the  same  time.  It  must  be  here,  in  Gettysburg, 
and  in  New  York  and  Boston,  and  London  and  in  Africa, 


this  assumption  is  considered  gratuitous  by  those  who  reject  this  doctrine, 
they,  of  course,  do  not  admit  its  force.  And  it  deserves  to  be  ever  remem- 
bered, that  only  fourteen  years  after  the  Form  of  Concord  was  published, 
when  Duke  Frederick  William,  during  the  minority  of  Christian  II.  pub- 
lished the  Visitation  Articles  of  Saxony,  in  1594,  in  order  to  suppress 
the  Melancthonian  tendencies  to  reject  this  and  other  peculiarities  of  the 
symbols,  the  article  on  this  subject,  framed  by  men  confessedly  adhering 
to  the  old  symbols,  and  designing  to  re-enunciate  their  true  import,  and 
enforced  upon  the  whole  church  in  Saxony  as  symbolic,  give  the  most  ob- 
jectionable view  of  this  doctrine,  viz.:  I.  "The  pure  doctrine  of  our 
Church  is,  that  the  words,  "Take  and  eat,  this  is  my  body,  drink,  this  is 
my  blood,  are  to  be  understood  simply  and  according  to  the  letter.'" 
II.  That  the  body  (which  is  received  and  eaten)  is  the  proper  and  natural 
body  (der  rcchte  naturliche  Lcib)  of  Christ,  which  hung  upon  the  cross  ; 
and  the  blood  (which  is  drunk)  is  the  proper  and  natural  blood  (das 
rechte,  naturliche  Blut )  ivhich  flowed  from  the  side  of  Christ."  Muller's 
Symb.  Books,  p.  847.  Now  we  cannot  persuade  ourselves,  that  this  is  the 
view  of  a  single  minister  of  the  General  Synod,  or  of  many  out  of  it;  and 
yet  these  arc  the  views  they  are  obligated  to  receive  if  they  avow  implicit 
allegiance  to  the  former  symbolical  boots  of  our  Church  in  Europe.  If 
they  adopt  the  modification  received  by  many  of  our  distinguished  divines, 
such  as  Mosheim,  Reiuhardt  and  others,  they  do  not  faithfully  embrace  the 
symbolical  doctrine,  and  should  not  profess  to  do  so. 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  129 

and  in  Asia,  at  the  same  time,  if  Christians  are  simulta- 
neously celebrating  the  holy  supper;  and  yet  his  body  was 
a  human  body  like  our  own,  whilst  on  earth,  and  even  after 
its  glorification,  was  confined  to  one  place  at  a  time,  as  it 
had  been  before.  When  the  glorified  Redeemer  appeared 
to  Mary  Magdalene  at  the  tomb,  he  was  not  also  with  his 
disciples  in  Jerusalem.  When  he  appeared  to  Cleopas  and 
another  disciple  on  the  way  to  Emmaus,  he  was  not  simul- 
taneously among  the  apostles  in  Jerusalem.  When  he  ap- 
peared to  the  assembled  apostles  in  the  absence  of  Thomas, 
Thomas  did  not  see  him  elsewhere  at  the  same  time.  When 
he  was  on  the  mount  in  Galilee,  or  at  the  sea  of  Tiberius, 
or  finally  at  Bethany,  whence  he  ascended,  he  was  seen  no 
where  else.  In  short,  his  body  seems  to  have  been  as  much 
confined  to  one  locality  at  a  time,  after  his  resurrection,  as 
before  his  death.  Since,  therefore,  we  have  no  intimation 
in  the  Scriptures,  that  glorified  bodies,  in  general,  can  oc- 
cupy different  portions  of  space  at  the  same  time,  and  since 
the  body  of  Christ  after  his  resurrection  did  in  every  in- 
stance appear  under  this  restriction  to  one  locality,  and 
there  is  no  intimation  of  a  miracle  in  the  Eucharist ;  the 
evidence  all  seems  to  be  against  the  doctrine  of  the  real 
presence  of  the  body  of  Christ  at  the  eucharist,  in  different 
places,  at  the  same  time. 

jr  Nor  can  the  assumption  of  the  Form  of  Concord  (Muller, 
p.  667-8,)  that  the  body  of  Christ  possesses  two  other  modes 
of  presence,  beside  the  local  presence,  be  sustained,  either 
by  reason  or  the  word  of  God.  The  alleged  "spiritual" 
presence  of  the  Saviour's  body,  is,  literally  interpreted,  a 
contradiction  in  terms.  And  the  other,  the  "divine  or 
heavenly"  presence,  which  is  attributed  to  his  body  in  com- 
mon with  the  Deity,  is  wholly  unscriptural,  as  well  as  op- 
posed to  the  essential,  unchangeable  difference  between  the 
creature  and  the  Creator,  the  finite  and  the  Infinite. 
!:  c)  This  interpretation  cannot  be  correct,  because  the  glo- 
rified body,  which  is  said  to  be  received  with  the  elements, 
had  actually  not  yet  any  existence,  and  therefore  could  not 
have  been  given  by  the  Saviour  to  his  disciples  at  the  Holy 
Supper.  The  idea,  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  same  thing 
to  be  and  not  to  be  at  the  same  time,  is  not  only  an  immu- 
table law  of  all  created  things  ;  so  far  as  the  human  mind 
can  perceive,  it  is  applicable  to  the  Deity  himself,  and  it  is 


130  THE    NATURE    OF    THE    SAVIOUR'S 

usually  admitted,  tliat  tilings  contradictory  in  tlieir  nature, 
are  not  embraced  in  the  range  of  the  divine  omnipotence. 
Hence,  if  Christ  had  intended  his  supper  for  this  purpose, 
he  would  have  told  his  disciples,  "Ye  cannot  indeed  now 
receive  this  supper  in  its  proper  import,  nor  receive  my 
body  in  it,  as  I  am  yet  alive  and  amongst  you;"  or  rather, 
if  it  had  been  the  intention  of  Christ  to  give  us  his  real 
glorified  body  in  the  eucharist,  he  would  have  deferred  the 
institution  of  the  ordinance  till  after  his  resurrection,  or 
have  left  it  to  his  apostles  to  institute  it,  after  he  had  wholly 
left  this  world,  and  ascended  to  his  heavenly  glory. 

d)  The  eucharist  could  not  have  conferred  the  broken 
body  to  the  disciples  at  its  institution;  because  it  was  not 
yet  broken,  crucified,  dead  :  nor  to  the  followers  of  Christ 
after  his  resurrection,  because  it  no  longer  exists  in  a  broken, 
dead  state,  but  in  a  risen,  re-animated,  glorified  condition. 
Therefore,  the  words  tsto  sgi,  "this  is,"  must,  of  necessity, 
have  been  figuratively  understood  by  the  disciples  at  the 
time  of  their  delivery,  in  the  institution  of  the  supper. 

e)  The  old  Lutheran  theory  cannot  be  correct,  according 
to  the  langiiagc  of  Christ,  because  he  says,  Luke  xxii,  19, 
"  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me,"  &ig  Wjv  s/x^v  dva/jt-vr^jv,  i.  e. 
in  mei  recordationem,  (Schleusner,)  in  commemoration  of 
me ;  but  we  perform  an  act  in  remembrance  of  any  person 
or  event,  only  when  it  is  past  and  absent.  We  deliver  a 
sermon  in  commemoration  or  memory  of  the  Reformation, 
or  of  General  Washington,  only  because  they  are  past  and 
absent.  Even  when  we  commemorate  the  deeds  of  living 
men,  those  deeds  must  be  past,  which  are  to  constitute  the 
burden  of  our  eulogy. 

/)  That  the  doctrine  of  the  real  2>resence  cannot  be  true, 
is  proved  by  those  passages  of  scripture  which  represent 
Christ  as  having  left  this  world,  as  having  returned  to  the 
Father,  and  as  being  seated  at  his  right  hand  in  heaven ; 
John  xvi.  28,  "I  came  forth  from  the  Father,  and  am  come 
into  the  world;"  again,  "I  leave  the  world,  and  go  to  the 
Father."  Matth.  xxvi.  11.  "For ye  have  the  poor  always 
with  you  ;  but  me  ye  have  not  always."  John  xvi.  7.  "It 
is  expedient  for  you  that  I  go  away,  for  if  I  go  not  away, 
the  Comforter  will  not  come  unto  you ;  but  if  I  depart,  I 
will  send  him  unto  you."     We  are  told  by  the  Saviour  him- 


PRESENCE     IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  131 

self,  not  to  yield  credence  to  such  as  say,  "Lo,  here  is  Christ 
or  there."     Matth.  xxiv.  23. 

When  he  took  his  final  leave  of  his  disciples,  Luke  tells 
us,  "he  was  carried  up  into  heaven."  And  although  the 
Saviour  left  on  record  the  delightful  promise,  that  he  would 
be  always  with  his  disciples  till  the  end  of  the  world  ;  it 
was  in  his  divine  nature,  which  is  omnipresent ;  and  his  next 
visible  appearance,  the  angels  informed  the  men  of  Galilee 
at  his  ascension,  would  again  be  from  heaven  in  like  manner, 
as  they  had  seen  him  ascend.     Acts  i.  11. 

In  Acts  iii.  21,  Peter  declares,  that  "  The  heavens  must  re- 
ceive him  until  the  times  of  the  restitution  (atfoxa<ras'a<j'i£, 
fulfillment  or  accomplishment,)  of  all  the  things  which  God 
had  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  all  his  holy  prophets,  since  the 
world  began."  We  are  told  by  Paul,  "That  the  Lord  will 
descend  from  heaven  as  with  the  voice  of  an  archangel," 
1  Thess.  iv.  16;  and  again,  the  same  inspired  writer  ex- 
horts the  Colossians,  "  Seek  those  things  which  are  above, 
where  Christ  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God"  iii.  1.  Now 
whilst  all  these  passages  and  many  others,  teach  us  that 
Christ  has  left  this  world,  and  is  now  seated  in  heaven,  we 
know  of  not  a  single  passage  which  intimates  that  he  is 
present  at  any  sacramental  celebration,  But  if  it  were  true, 
that  his  body,  which  was  last  seen  ascending  to  heaven,  is 
all  the  while  present  on  earth,  at  one  or  other  place  where 
the  supper  is  commemorated,  and  often  at  thousands  of 
places  at  the  same  moment ;  is  it  unreasonable  to  suppose, 
that  such  a  remarkable  fact,  such  an  almost  incessant  mira- 
cle in  the  church  of  all  ages,  would  at  least  be  alluded  to  in 
a  single  instance  in  the  New  Testament  ? 

g)  Again,  whilst  the  idea,  that  Christ  is  figuratively  rep- 
resented as  the  spiritual  food  of  the  believer,  is  a  delightful, 
consoling  and  becoming  one;  the  supposition  that  the  be- 
liever is  to  eat  the  actual  flesh  of  his  best  friend,  and  drink 
his  real  blood,  is  a  gross,  repulsive  and  unnatural  idea,  vhich 
nothing  but  the  clearest  evidence  would  authorize  us  to  adopt. 
The  eating  of  flesh  and  blood  even  of  beasts  was  forbidden 
by  the  Jewish  law,  Gen.  ix.  4. ;  with  how  much  more  horror 
would  the  disciples  of  the  Saviour  have  been  filled,  had 
they  understood  him  as  enjoining  on  them  habitually  to  eat 
and  drink  his  body  and  blood  ?  Yet  they  exhibit  no  indi- 
cation of  such  horror  or  surprise,  and,  therefore,  did  not  un- 


132       THE  NATURE  OF  THE  SAVIOUR'S 

derstand  the  Saviour  as  requiring  such  a  repulsive  act.  Yea, 
the  council  of  apostles  and  elders,  at  Jerusalem,  after  the 
Saviour's  death,  prohibit  the  eating  of  blood.  Acts  xv.  28. 
Hence,  it  is  not  surprising  that,  amid  the  long  catalogue  of 
Protestant  creeds,  of  every  denomination,  there  is  not  a 
single  one,  which  adopts  this  doctrine  of  the  real  presence 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  eucharist,  except  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  the  other  former  symbolical  books 
of  our  church.  Several  Protestant  symbols  do  indeed  em- 
ploy language  seemingly  implying  this  doctrine,  but  they  ex- 
plain it  away  in  other  passages,  so  that  this  doctrine  is  not 
understood  to  belong  to  any  other  church.  We  know  the 
Form  of  Concord  rejects  the  idea  of  gross  Capernaitish 
eating ;  but  it  at  the  same  time  denies  that  it  is  mere  figura- 
tive eating,  eating  by  faith  alone,  and  between  literal  and 
figurative  eating  of  a  real  body  of  flesh  and  blood,  there  is 
no  third  or  intermediate  mode  of  eating  conceivable.  The 
term  "spiritual"  is  used  by  the  Form  of  Concord  ;  but  ap- 
plied to  eating  and  drinking  material  flesh  and  blood,  it  must 
signify  figurative  eating,  or  it  signifies  nothing  intelligible 
at  all. 

But  are  there  no  arguments  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
real  presence  ? 

There  are  several  expressions,  in  the  portion  of  Scripture 
discussing  this  subject,  which  have  been  supposed  to  favor 
Luther's  interpretation.  At  first  view,  and  especially  in 
our  vulgar  version,  they  may  seem  to  possess  the  appearance 
of  force ;  yet,  on  close  examination,  this  will  disappear,  es- 
pecially before  the  mass  of  contrary  evidence,,  pervading  the 
whole  passage. 

1.  1  Cor.  xi.  29.  "  Wherefore  whosoever  shall  eat  this 
bread  and  drink  this  cup  (wine)  of  the  Lord,  unworthily, 
shall  be  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,"  svoyo- 
grfrai  <rs  Cwfjuswog  xai  <rou  ai^xarog'  <rou  yyp1*  '•  "  sna^  De  g'udty 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  ;"  that  is,  "  shall  com- 
mit sin  in  regard  to  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,"  viz., 
by  treating  the  solemnly  appointed  commemoration  of  them 
with  levity  or  irreverence.  It  has  been  said,  "How  could 
we  be  guilty  of  the  body  of  Christ,  if  it  were  not  present  V* 
We  answer :  To  be  guilty  of  the  body,  means  in  the  orig- 
inal, to  be  guilty  or  commit  sin  in  reference  to  the  body  ; 
that  is,  to  make  the  body  of  Christ  the  occasion  of  commit- 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  1'33 

ting  sin.  And  must  not  all  admit,  that  we  can  and  often 
do  commit  ski  in  regard  to  absent  persons  and  things  ? 
May  we  not  sin,  or  be  guilty  in  regard  to  an  absent  friend, 
by  slandering  or  even  thinking  ill  of  him,  just  as  well  as 
when  he  is  present?  Do  we  not  insult  the  majesty  of  an 
absent  king,  when  we  treat  with  indignity  a  monument  or 
other  memorial  which  has  been  established  in  honor  of 
him  ?  And  the  unworthy  communicant  is  specifically  said 
to  have  been  guilty  in  reference  to  the  body  of  Christ,  be- 
cause it  was  his  body,  which  was  specially  represented  by 
the  symbols  which  he  treats  irreverently  in  the  Lord's 
Supper.  He  is  guilty  of  treating  with  irreverence,  that 
sacred  institution  which  the  Saviour  appointed  under  the 
most  affecting  circumstance,  to  commemorate  the  breaking 
of  his  body  and  shedding  of  his  blood  upon  the  cross,  and 
thus  commits  sin  in  regard  to  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Lord.  Thus,  James  ii.  10,  the  phrase,  "guilty  of"  ivoyoc, 
is  used  in  the  same  general  acceptation :  Whosoever  shall 
keep  the  whole  law,  and  yet  shall  offend  in  one  point,  is 
guilty  of  all  (jsyoxs  ko.vtuv  (vojulwv)  svo^o.c),  commits  sin  in 
regard  to  all  other  points  of  the  law. 

The  reason  of  their  guilt  is  further  described  by  Paul 
thus,  "  not  discerning  the  Lord' 's  body"  that  is,  not  distin- 
guishing between  ordinary  bread  and  these  consecrated 
symbols  of  the  Lord's  body  and  blood.  Ernesti  justly  re- 
marks,1 that  this  use  of  the  term  employed  by  the  Apostle, 
"discerning,"  (6ict>.piv^v,)  originated  from  the  Jewish 
habit  of  distinguishing  clean  from  unclean  meats,  according 
to  the  law  of  Moses.  Those  were  said  not  to  discern  or 
distinguish  the  meats,  who  ate  indiscriminately  both  clean 
and  unclean  or  forbidden  meats.  See  Ezek.  xliw  23.  Tins- 
remark  is  the  more  important,  as  the  Apostle  Paul  had,  in 
the  previous  context  (x.  18  and  27)  spoken  of  things  offered 
in  sacrifice  both  by  the  Jews  and  Gentiles. 

2.  The  other  passage,  is  1  Cor.  x.  16.  The  cup  of  bles- 
sing which  we  bless,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  blood  of- 
Christ  ?  The  bread  which  we  break,  is  it  not  the  communion 
of  the  body  of  Christ?  "ovyt  (Vo  co<rrpjov)  xojvwv/oc  rx  pUjxa- 
Tog  m  Xpijjs  hj'ri; — ("tov  ap-rov)  ou36  xwvwvia  <rs  tfujxotros  <rz 
Xpigs  edViv  ;" 

(1)  Opusc.  thcol.  p.  136. 
12 


134  THE    NATURE    OF    THE    SAVIOUR'S 

Koivwvia.  The  term  xoivwvia,  communion,  has  several  sig- 
nifications in  the  N.  T.  1,  communication  or  bestowment  of 
a  benefit,  beneficence.     See  Rom.  xv.  26.     2    Cor.  ix.  13. 

2,  conjunction,  society,  spiritual  communion.  Acts  ii.  42. 
And  they  continued  steadfastly  in  the  Apostles'  doctrine 
zndfellotvship,  (xoivwvia.)  1  Cor.  i.  9.  God  is  faithful  by 
whom  ye  were  called  to  the  fellowship,  (xojvwvjo,,)  of  his 
Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord. 

2  Cor.  vi.  14.  What  communion,  (xojvwvia,)  community 
of  interest,  or  adaptation  for  close  union,  hath  light,  the 
children  of  light,  christians,  with  darkness,  the  children  of 
darkness,  "unbelievers/' 

2  Cor.  xiii.  13.  The  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and 
the  love  of  God,  and  the  communion,  (xoiv^ovia,)  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,    be  with  you  all. 

Gal.  ii.  9.  And  when  James,  Cephas  and  John,  who 
seemed  to  be  pillars,  perceived  the  grace  that  was  given 
me,  they  gave  to  me  and  Barnabas  the  right  hand  of  fellow- 
ship, (xoivwvia.) 

Ephes.  iii.  9.  And  to  make  all  men  see  what  is  the  fel- 
lowship (xojvwvja)  which  hath  been  hid  in  God. 

Philipp.  i.  5.  I  thank  my  God — for  your  fellowship 
(xoivwvjct)  in  the  Gospel  from  the  first  day  until  now. 

ii.  1.     If  there  be — any  fellowship  (xoivwvia)  of  the 

Spirit, — fulfil  ye  my  joy,  &c. 

iii.  10.  That  I  may  know  the  power  of  his  resur- 
rection and  the  fellowship  (xojvwvia)  of  his  sufferings. 

Phil.  v.  6.  That  the  communication  (xoivwvia)  of  thy 
faith  may  become  effectual. 

1  John  i.  3,  6,  7.  That  ye  also  may  have  fellowship 
(xojvwvja)  with  us,  &c. 

As  to  the  Lutheran  and  Romish  interpretation,  which 
supposes  this  passage  to  teach  the  actual  presence  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ,  it  is  liable  to  all  the  objections 
above  enumerated  in  regard  to  that  doctrine.  But  a  moral 
signification,  as  is  evident  from  the  passages  just  quoted, 
is  far  more  agreeable  to  the  usus  loquendi,  and  is  perfectly 
easy  and  natural.  The  cup  of  the  blessing — is  it  not  the 
communion,  does  it  not  bring  us  spiritually  into  communion 
with  the  body  of  Christ,  &c.  In  the  same  sense  it  is  said 
of  the  Jews  in  v.  18  :  "are  not  they  who  eat  of  the  sacri- 
fices,  partakers  of  the  altar?    oup£«— jcoiv&jvoi  rou  SrutfiaflVyjpja 


PRESENCE    IK   THE    EUCHARIST.  135 

ziU,  in  communion  -with  the  altar?  here  we  find  the  very 
same  word,  xoivwvoj,  employed,  and  yet,  who  would  infer, 
that  the  Jews  ate  the  God  whom  they  worshipped,  or 
the  altar  on  which  they  sacrificed,  or  any  thing-  more 
than  the  outward  offerings  ?  In  like  manner,  in  the  next 
verse,  20,  "The  things  which  the  Gentiles  sacrifice,  they 
sacrifice  to  devils  or  demons, — and  I  would  not  that  ye 
should  have  fellowship,  communion,  xoivwvoug  rwv  5a»/Aovicjv 
ywEf&ou,  with  devils.  Who  would  suppose,  that  the  Gen- 
tiles, in  their  sacrifices,  had  communion  with  the  bodies  of 
the  dead  heroes  and  demigods  whom  they  worshipped  ? 
Yet  if  the  word,  xoivwvia  (and  xoivuvss,)  in  the  one  case, 
means  the  actual  participation  of  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the 
beincr  commemorated,  what  reason  can  be  assigned  for  its 
having  so  different  a  signification  in  the  other?  The  lan- 
guage  in  both  cases  is  substantially  the  same,  yea,  the 
identical  word,  only  in  one  case  used  substantively,  and 
with  the  other  adjectively.  If,  then,  the  words  mean,  that 
the  sacramental  communicant  receives  the  flesh  and  blood 
of  Christ,  in  addition  to  the  outward  elements,  they  atso 
teach,  that  the  partakers  at  heathen  altars,  likewise  eat  the 
flesh  and  drink  the  blood  of  those  heroes  and  demigods  to 
whom  they  offer  sacrifice. 

In  addition  to  the  scriptural  passages  in  favor  of  the  pres- 
ence of  the  body  of  the  Saviour  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  there 
is  a  theological  argument  or  theory,  which,  though  in  part 
rejected  by  Luther  himself,  was  adopted  by  some  of  his 
followers,  and  about  a  quarter  of  a  century  after  his  death, 
was  introduced  in  its  full  development  into  the  Form  of  Con- 
cord, which  became  the  standard  of  Lutheran  orthodoxy  in 
some  parts  of  Germany.  Luther's  view  of  the  personal 
union  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ  he  thus  judiciously  ex- 
presses :  If  it  should  be  objected  on  the  ground  of  reason, 
"That  the  Godhead  cannot  suffer  nor  die ;  you  must  an- 
swer :  That  is  true ;  nevertheless,  as  the  divinity  and  hu- 
manity in  Christ  constitute  one  person,  therefore  the  Scrip- 
tures, on  account  of  this  personal  unity,  also  attribute  every 
thing  to  the  Deity,  which  occurred  to  the  humanity,  and  vice 
versa.  This  is,  moreover,  accordant  with  truth  ;  for  you 
must  affirm  that  the  person  (Christ,)  suffers  and  dies.  Now 
the  person  is  the  true  God,  therefore  it  is  proper  to  say,  the 
Son  of  God  suffers.     For  although  one  part  (if  I  may  so 


136  THE    NATURE     OF    THE    SAVIOUR'S 

speak)  namely,  the  Godhead  does  not  suffer  ;  still  the  person 
which  is  God,  suffers  in  its  other  part,  that  is  in  its  humanity 
(denn  obwohl  das  eine  Stueck  (dasz  ich  so  rede)  als  die 
Gottheit  nicht  leidet ;  so  leidet  dennoch  die  Person,  welche 
Gott  ist,  am  andern  Stuecke,  als  an  der  Menschheit.)  Thus 
we  say,  The  king's  son  has  a  sore,  and  yet  it  is  only  his  ]eg 
that  is  affected  :  Solomon  is  wise,  and  yet  it  is  only  his  soul 
which  possesses  wisdom  :  Absalom  is  beautiful,  and  yet  it 
was  only  his  body  that  is  referred  to  :  Peter  is  gray,  and 
yet  it  is  only  his  head  of  which  this  is  affirmed.  For  as  soul 
and  body  constitute  but  one  person,  every  thing  which  hap- 
pens either  to  the  body  or  the  soul,  yea  even  to  the  smallest 
member  of  the  body,  is  justly  and  properly  attributed  to  the 
whole  person.  This  mode  of  expression  is  not  peculiar  to 
the  Scriptures,  but  prevails  throughout  the  world,  and  is 
also  correct.  Thus  the  Son  of  God  was  in  truth  crucified 
for  us,  that  is,  the  person  which  is  God  ;  for  this  person,  I 
say,  was  crucified  according  to  its  humanity."  (Luth.  Works, 
Jena  edit.  vol.  3,  p.  457.)  Yet  Luther,  also,  sometimes  em- 
ployed language  inconsistent  with  the  statements  which  he 
here  makes.  The  theory  above  referred  to,  was  claimed  by 
its  advocates  as  a  legitimate  sequence  of  the  hypostatic  union 
of  the  two  natures  of  Christ,  and  is  known  as  the  Commu- 
nicaiio  Idiomatum,  or  supposed  reciprocal  communication  of 
attributes  between  the  two  natures  of  the  Saviour,  one  re- 
sult of  which  is  to  be,  that  his  body  now  possesses  ubiquity  ; 
and,  therefore,  can  not  only  be  present  simultaneously 
wherever  the  Holy  Supper  is  administered,  but  actually  is 
present  every  where  else  in  the  universe.  In  support  of  "this 
opinion  several  Scripture  passages  are  alleged : 

Coloss.  ii.  9.  For  in  him  dwelleth  the  fullness  of  the  God- 
head, bodily"  (Tw/xarjxoj-.  This  passage,  we  think,  naturally 
signifies,  in  Christ  the  real,  not  imaginary,  the  full  divinity 
and  not  an  inferior  deity  dwells ;  that  is,  with  his  human 
nature  the  truly  divine  nature  is  really,  not  figuratively,  or 
typically,  but  actually  united  Cwjutccnxus  personally,  that  is, 
into  one  person.  This  signification  of  the  term  cC)j.a,  as  sig- 
nifying person,  is  found  both  in  the  N.  T.  and  in  classic 
Greek.  James  iii.  6.  So  is  the  tongue  among  our  mem- 
bers thatitdefileth  the  whole  body,i.  e.  person  (o/\cv  -o  cwjuta,) 
for  certainly  the  fact,  that  "the  tongue  is  a  world  of  in- 
iquity," does  not  consist  in  its  polluting  the  literal  body,  but 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST  137 

the  person,  the  character  of  the  individual.  Thus  also 
Xenophon  uses  tfwjxara  £\sv§spa,  for  freemen,  free  persons. 
Lycurgus,  and  Aeschynes  employ  tfwj.a  in  the  same  sense, 
to  signify  a  person.  The  same  usage  meets  us  in  the  Latin 
language :  Longeque  ante  omnia  corpora  Nisus  emicat. 
^Eneid  v.  1.  318,  where  the  reference  is  to  the  person  in  gen- 
eral. And  even  in  our  own  tongue,  the  term  body  has  the 
same  meaning,  in  such  phrases  as  "  some  body,"  "  no  body," 
&c,  for  some  person,  no  person,  &c. 

John  iii.  34.  "  For  God  giveth  not  the  Spirit  by  measure 
unto  him,"  (but  c'^s-pcj.c).  This  may  signify,  that  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Holy  Spirit  did  not  rest  on  the  Saviour,  only 
at  particular  times  and  in  a  limited  degree,  as  it  did  on  the 
prophets  of  the  Old  Testament;  but  at  all  times  and  in  an 
unlimited  degree.  Or  the  idea  may  be,  that  the  actual  or 
entire  divinity  dwelt  in  him,  i.  e.  was  personally  united  with 
him.  But  there  is  certainly  no  intimation  in  it  of  the  transfer 
of  the  divine  attributes  to  the  humanity  of  Christ. 

Matth.  xxviii.  18.  "All  power  (-rct^a  s^-Cja  all  authority, 
not  irala  S.vc/.-u;)  is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth." 
This  certainly  does  not  signify  power,  omnipotence  ;  but  all 
or  full  authority  to  command  and  direct  all  things  on  earth 
to  the  accomplishment  of  the  purposes  of  his  mediatorial 
reign. 

In  this  sense  the  word  (k^tiu),  translated  power  in  the 
passage  under  consideration,  is  often  employed  in  the  New 
Testament.  Thus,  Matth.  xxi.  23,  the  chief  priests  and 
elders,  came  to  him,  when  he  was  teaching,  and  said:  "By 
what  authority  (ifii'ia)  doest  thou  these  things  ?"  And  (vii. 
29,)  the  people  were  astonished  at  his  doctrine,  "For  he 
taught  them  as  one  having  authority  (ifztf.a),  and  not  as  the 
scribes."  In  the  same  general  sense,  as  signifying  author- 
ity, liberty,  &c,  having  no  reference  to  omnipotence  or 
physical  power,  this  word  is  employed  in  many  other  pas- 
sages, so  that  the  declaration  of  the  Saviour:  "All  power 
or  authority  is  given  to  me,"  has  no  necessary  reference  to 
physical  power  or  omnipotence.  See  Matth.  ix.  6.  Mark 
ii.  10.  Luke  v.  24.  1  Cor.  ix.  4,  18.  2  The?s.  iii.  9.  In 
perfect  accordance  with  this  import,  is  the  classic  usage 
of  the  word  s  s  -  a,  as  signifying  "licentia,  potestas,  aucto- 
ritas,  jus  sive  faeultas  moralis ;  at  fluvetvi:  vis  activa  sen 
facultas  naturalist  licence,  power,  authority,  a  moral  right; 
12a 


138  THE    NATURE    OF    THE    SAVIOUR'S 

whilst  owaiug   signifies  a   physical   or  natural    faculty  or 
power. 

To  this  doctrine  of  the  ubiquity  of  the  body  of  Christ, 
numerous  and  formidable  objections  present  themselves. 

1.  The  idea  that  the  properties  of  one  substance  can  be- 
come the  properties  of  a  different  substance,  is  a  philosophical 
absurdity. 

2.  It  is  impossible,  in  the  nature  of  things,  that  the  infi- 
nite properties  of  God,  the  uncreated  one,  should  be  com- 
municated to  any  creature.  The  difference  between  the 
creature  and  the  Creator  is  an  infinite  and  unchangeable  one. 
Yet,  if  the  human  nature  of  Christ  acquired  possession  of 
divine  attributes,  it  must  itself  be  divine. 

3.  Wherever  any  one  divine  attribute  is  found,  there  the 
others  must  also  be,  and  that  is  God.  If  then  the  body  of 
Christ,  or  his  humanity  in  general,  possesses  one  divine  at- 
tribute, it  must  possess  them  all  and  must  be  God.  Yes  the 
finite  has  become  infinite,  the  creature  has  become  the  Cre- 
ator, and  a  feeble  mortal  like  unto  us  in  all  things,  sin  only 
excepted,  has  become  the  immortal  God. 

A  distinction  has  been  made  between  mediate  and  imme- 
diate communication,  and  it  has  been  affirmed  the  attributes 
of  Deity  have  been  communicated  to  the  man  Jesus  only 
mediately.  But  mediate  communication  in  reference  to  this 
subject  is  no  communication  at  all,  and  can  only  signify,  that 
the  divine  nature  of  Christ  is  at  all  times  ready  to  exert 
his  divine  attributes  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  purposes 
of  the  associated  humanity,  and  this  no  one  denies,  but  this 
cannot  with  propriety  of  language  be  styled  communication 
of  attributes. 

4.  If  the  hypostatic  union  in  Christ  implies  a  communi- 
cation of  attributes,  it  must  be  reciprocal ;  and  whilst  the 
humanity  of  Christ  is  clothed  in  the  attributes  of  divinity,  his 
divinity  must  also  have  assumed  the  attributes  of  humanity  : 
have  become  human ;  which  the  opponents  are  unwilling  to 
admit. 

5.  If  this  hypostatic  union  is  attended  by  a  transfer  of 
attributes,  it  necessarily  involves  a  confusion  of  natures, 
which  error  was  condemned  by  the  ancient  church  in  the 
Eutychians.  And  if  it  was  such  as  to  preserve  the  attri- 
butes of  each  nature  distinct,  then  there  can  be  no  real 
transfer  of  attributes. 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  139 

6.  The  doctrine  of  the  ubiquity  of  Christ's  body  instead 
of  conferring  more  importance  on  the  Eucharist,  actually 
robs  it  of  all  special  interest,  and  gives  no  more  to  the  sacra- 
ment than  to  every  other  object  and  place.  We  may  upon 
this  theory,  as  well  say  that  Christ's  body  is  in,  with  or 
under,  every  apple  and  pear,  peach  and  cake,  as  in  the 
consecrated  bread. 

7.  Nay  this  doctrine  is  not  entirely  exempt  from  liability 
to  the  charge  of  favoring  pantheism.  If  Christ's  body  is 
omnipresent,  we  are  in  him  and  he  in  us,  whether  believers 
or  unbelievers  we  are  one :  especially  as  all  bodies  must 
have  extension,  and  occupy  space,  and  exclude  other  bodies. 
The  idea  also  that  Christ  nourishes  our  souls  has  a 
similar  tendency,  by  leading  to  the  supposition  that  soul  and 
body  are  ultimately  identical,  or  of  the  same  substance. 

8.  If  the  glorified  body  of  Christ  is  really  in,  with,  or 
under  the  bread,  it  will  be  very  proper  to  direct  our  worship 
towards  the  bread,  and  thus  adore  the  present  God-man 
who  is  somehow  connected  with  it.  For  we  know  that  his 
divine  nature  is  there,  as  it  is  omnipresent:  and  therefore 
we  would  have  as  much  reason  to  worship  towards  the  bread 
as  if  he  were  personally  and  visibly  to  appear  in  connexion 
with  it. 

9.  It  will  be  admitted  that  the  union  of  the  two  natures 
in  Christ,  was  just  as  real  and  intimate  during  his  life  on 
earth  as  it  ever  will  be  ;  (for  it  is  decided  by  the  Form  of 
Concord,  to  have  commenced  at  the  moment  of  his  concep- 
tion by  the  Virgin  Mary.)  Now  as  this  union  produced  not 
even  the  shadow  of  a  communicatio  idiomatum  (transfer  or 
communication  of  attributes)  on  earth,  it  is  not  probable 
that  it  will  hereafter.  It  certainly  proves,  that  such  com- 
munication is  not  the  natural  result  of  the  hypostatic  union 
in  Christ,  and  therefore  it  cannot  be  true,  unless  the  Scrip- 
tures expressly  teach  that  this  union  will  produce  very  dif- 
ferent results  in  eternity  frcm  those  which  attend  it  in  this 
world,  which  is  not  contended. 

Finally,  the  discourse  of  our  Lord  to  his  disciples  at  Ca- 
pernaum, recorded  in  John  vi.  25-55.  has  sou  hough 
contrary  to  the  of  Luther  and  the  other  principal 
reformers,  been  and  to 
teach.  manducation  of  the  Saviour's  body  and  the 
drinking  of  his  blood.     It  is  true  our  Saviour  here  employs 


140  THE    NATURE    OF    OUR    SAVIOUR'S 

the  language,  "I  am  the  bread  of  life,"  as  he  elsewhere 
does  the  expression,  "I  am  the  vine,"  and  "  I  am  the  light 
of  the  world,"  &c.  John  viii.  12.  Again,  the  Saviour  also 
says,  "  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and  drink 
his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you,"  &c.  v.  54.  That  these 
and  similar  expressions  in  this  discourse,  can  have  no  refer- 
ence to  the  Lord's  supper,  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  no 
such  ordinance  as  the  eucharist  then  existed,  or  had  been 
heard  of.  This  discourse,  according  to  the  most  probable 
chronological  arrangement  of  the  evangelical  narrative,  was 
delivered  about  a  year  before  the  Saviour  instituted  it,  and 
before  his  disciples  could  possibly  have  had  the  least  idea  of 
such  intended  memorial.  Of  course  they  could  not  under- 
stand these  words,  as  referring  to  an  ordinance  of  which 
they  had  never  heard,  and  to  the  future  institution  of  which 
there  was  not  a  single  allusion  in  the  discourse  itself. 

Again,  that  the  Saviour  in  this  entire  discourse  had  refer- 
ence to  his  being  the  food  of  believers,  is  abundantly  evident 
from  the  phraseology  employed.  1)  In  v.  35,  to  the  words, 
"I  am  the  bread  of  life,"  he  immediately  adds  by  way  of 
explanation,  "he  that  cometh  to  me,  shall  never  hunger,  he 
that  believeth  on  me  shall  never  thirst,"  showing  that  it  is  by 
faith,  that  he  becomes  the  bread  of  life  to  us.  2)  v.  40. 
"  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son,  hath  everlasting  life,"  show- 
ing the  necessity  of  faith  to  the  enjoyment  of  this  spiritual 
food.  Also,  3)  v.  47.  "Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  he 
that  believeth  on  me  hath  everlasting  life — I  am  that  bread  of 
life."  4)  v.  51.  The  bread  which  I  will  give  is  my  flesh, 
which  I  will  give  for  the  life  of  the  world,"  i.  e.  which  flesh 
I  will  give,  not  to  believers  to  be  eaten  ;  but  for  them  on  the 
cross  ;  and  not  for  believers  only,  who  receive  the  holy  sup- 
per, but  for  the  "world,"  many  who  reject  my  atonement 
and  never  celebrate  the  supper,  which  I  shall  institute  in 
commemoration  of  my  death.  If  sacramental  eating  were 
intended,  it  must  have  been  limited  to  his  professed  follow- 
ers, who  celebrate  the  ordinance  ;  and  could  not  have  been 
extended  to  the  world  at  laiye  who  neglect  it.  5)  v.  56. 
"He  that  ea'teth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood,  dwelleth 
in  me  and  I  in  him."  If  this  passage  teaches  a  physical 
eating  and  indwelling  of  the  Saviour's  body  in  the  commu- 
nicant, it  also  affirms  that  the  communicant's  body  dwells  in 
the  bod}-  of  the  Saviour,  which  is  absurd.     6)  v.  63.  "It  is 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  141 

the  Spirit  that  quickeneth,  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing:  the 
words  that  I  speak  unto  you  they  are  spirit  and  they  are 
life."  Here  the  Saviour  seems,  in  the  closing-  words  of  this 
discourse,  expressly  to  teach  that  the  literal  eating  of  his 
flesh  would  profit  them  nothing;  that  it  is  the  Spirit  that 
quickeneth,  and  that  his  words  are  spirit,  are  to  be  spirit- 
ually and  not  literally  understood.  This  interpretation  is 
moreover  confirmed  by  the  succeeding  remark  of  Christ: 
7)  v.  64.  "But  there  are  some  of  you  that  believe  not," 
some  who  have  no  faith,  and  therefore  cannot  thus  spiritu- 
ally feed  on  my  flesh  and  blood.  From  all  these  considera- 
tions, we  cannot  but  coincide  with  the  judgment  of  Luther 
and  the  most  distinguished  divines  of  ancient  and  modern 
days,  as  expressed  by  the  learned  Lutheran  theologian 
Gerhard  :  "  The  passage,  John  vi.  53,  does  not  treat  of  sacra- 
mental but  of  spiritual  eating  the  body  and  drinking  the  blood 
of  Christ,  which  is  essential  to  salvation  for  all."  ' 

§  4.     The  second  tropical  Interpretation  (by  Calvin.) 

The  third  interpretation  of  these  words  is  that  of  Calvin, 
which  though  generally  abandoned  by  his  followers  in  Eu- 
rope and  America,  is  deserving  of  a  passing  notice.  That 
distinguished  Reformer,  animated  by  a  noble  desire  to  pre- 
vent a  schism  in  the  Protestant  church  of  Europe,  though 
he  could  not  adopt  the  view  of  Luther  on  this  subject,  la- 
boured hard  to  come  as  near  it  as  possible,  without  making 
himselt  liable  to  the  grosser  objections  which  lie  against  the 
Lutheran  dogma.  He  supposed  the  words  of  the  institution 
to  teach,  not  that  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  present 
at  the  celebration  of  the  eucharist ;  but  that  they  remain  in 
heaven,  and  from  there  a  supernatural  influence  emanates 
from  the  glorified  body  of  Christ,  by  which  the  soul  of  the 
believer  is  animated  and  strengthened  in  a  mysterious 
manner. 

This  interpretation  is  indeed  free  from  the  charge  of  con- 
flicting with  the  testimony  of  the  senses;  but  it  seems  so 
entirely  different  from  either  the  literal  or  the  figurative 


(1)  Dictum  John  vi.  53,  non  de  sacramentali  scd  spirituali  corporis  et 
sanguinis  Christi  manducatione  et  bibitionc  tractat,  qua;  omnibus  ad 
salutem  necessaria  est.     Loci  Theol.  de  Sacra  Coena. 


142  THE   NATURE    OF   THE    SAVIOUR'S 

import  of  the  Saviour's  words,  as  to  bear  evident  marks  of 
having  grown  out  of  extraneous  theological  considerations. 

Calvin's  own  language  on  this  subject  is :  "  I  therefore 
maintain,  that  in  the  mystery  of  the  supper,  by  the  emblems 
of  bread  and  wine,  Christ  is  really  exhibited  to  us  ;  that  is, 
his  body  and  blood,  in  which  he  yielded  full  obedience,  in 
order  to  work  out  a  righteousness  for  us ;  by  which,  in  the 
first  place,  we  may,  as  it  were,  become  united  with  him  into 
one  body;  and  secondly,  being  made  partakers  of  the  sub- 
stance of  himself,  also  be  strengthened  by  the  reception  of 
every  blessing."1  The  entire  opinion  of  Calvin  is  thus 
stated  by  Dr.  Bretschneider,  a  very  distinguished  late  writer 
of  Germany :  "  Calvin's  spiritual  reception  of  the  body  and 
bloo^  of  Christ,  is  indeed  a  real,  but  not  an  oral  one,  and 
consists  in  this :  that  in  the  moment  in  which  we  partake  of 
the  bread  and  wine,  if  our  hearts  are  by  faith  elevated  to 
him,  a  supernatural  influence  emanates  from  the  substance 
of  the  glorified  body  of  Christ,  (which  is  in  heaven  and 
remains  there,)  by  which  the  soul  of  the  believer  is  ani- 
mated and  strengthened  in  a  mysterious  manner.  But  the 
unbeliever  receives  nothing  more  than  bread  and  wine."2 

It  may,  perhaps,  be  regarded  as  a  striking  coincidence, 
that  the  views  of  the  two  most  illustrious  reformers  on  this 
subject,  have  been  almost  universally  abandoned  by  their 
followers ;  even  whilst  they  adhere  to  nearly  all  the  other 
features  of  their  doctrinal  system.  Yea,  the  view  of  Calvin, 
though  the  subject  of  much  less  controversy,  has  been 
more  universally  rejected  by  those  who  bear  his  name,  than 
has  that  of  Luther  by  his  followers. 

§  5.     The  true,  Historical  and  Pauline  interpretation 
of  the  words  of  the  Institution. 
We  come  now,  in  the  last  place,  to  attempt  an  unbiassed, 
impartial  examination  of  the  words  of  the  institution,  ac- 

(1)  Dico  igitur  in  coense  mystsrio  per  symbola  panis  et  viai  Christum 
vers  nobis  exhiberi,  adeoque  corpus  et  sanguinem  ejus,  in  quibns  omnem 
obeclientiam  pro  comparauda  nobis  justitia  adimplevit ;  quo  scilicet  primum 
in  unum  corpus  cum  ipso  coalescamus ;  deinde  participes  substantce  ejus 
facti,  in  bonorura  omnium  communicatione  virtutem  quoque  sentiamus. 
Institut.  Lib.  IV.  Cap.  XVII.  II. 

(2)  Dr.  Bretscbueider's  Systematische  Entwickelung  aller  in  der  Dog- 
matik  vorkommender  Begriffe.  p.  721,  ed.  3,  1826. 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  143 

cording  to  the  fair  principles  of  historical  interpretation,  as 
laid  down  in  our  introductory  observations. 

Was  there  any  thing  peculiar  in  the  occasion  and  the 
circumstances,  attending  the  utterance  of  these  wojds,  cal- 
culated to  illustrate  their  meaning? 

The  Saviour  and  his  disciples  had  just  celebrated  the 
Passover,  an  institution  appointed  of  God  to  commemorate 
an  important  event  of  the  Old  Testament  history,  at  which 
it  was  not  unusual  to  use  language  similar  to  that  of  our 
Saviour.  At  its  institution,  though  it  was  expressly  ap- 
pointed to  commemorate  the  passing  of  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  over  the  Israelites  in  Egypt,  whilst  he  destroyed  the 
first  born  of  the  Egyptians ;  yet,  Moses  uses  language  sim- 
ilar to  that  of  the  Saviour:  "Ye  shall  eat  it  in  haste,  for 
it  is  the  Lord's  passing  over,"  i.  e.  it  signifies  the  angel  of 
the  Lord's  passing  over  the  house  of  the  Israelites,  &c. 
Exod.  xii.  26,  27.  No  one  imagines  these  words  to  mean : 
"The  lamb  that  was  slain  at  the  passover,  was  the  passing 
over  of  the  Lord's  angel."  All  admit  that  "is"  here  is 
equivalent  to  signifies. 

This  ordinance,  whilst  it  commemorated  the  divine  favor 
to  the  Israelites  in  Egypt,  also,  as  Paul  tells  us,  was  typical 
of  the  Saviour  himself. 

Now,  it  was  at  the  close  of  this  mnemonic  or  commem- 
orative and  symbolic  paschal  supper,  where  symbolic  ideas1 
prevailed,  and  figurative  language  is  usual  among  the  Jews,1 
even  to  this  day,  that  the  Saviour  uttered  the  words  under 
consideration. 

1.  After  the  paschal  supper,  "Jesus  took  bread."  It  was 
natural  bread,  not  miraculously  furnished.  He  took  the 
bread,  which  happened  to  be  prepared  for  the  passover, 
and  which,  according  to  Jewish  law,  must  be  unleavened 
bread.  Yet,  it  is  equally  certain,  from  the  New  Testament, 
as  the  primitive  christians  received  the  Lord's  supper  every 
week,  and  often  more  frequently,  that  on  some  occasions, 
they  used  leavened  bread,  as  no  other  was  at  hand. 

2.  Jesus  "offered  a  prayer."  Mark,  and  perhaps  Mat- 
thew, use  the  term  i./,o.  ra;,  which  signifies  "to  bless," 
or  pronounce  a  blessing.     But  neither  of  them  says,  that  he 

(1)  See  Levi's  Forms  of  Prayer  for  Passover  and  Pentecost,  among  the 
Spanish  and  Portuguese  Jews,  p.  20. 


144      THE  NATURE  OF  THE  SAVIOUR'S 

blessed  "it,"  (<rs-ro,)  as  our  English  version  has  it.  Very 
good  manuscripts  read  sj^apiaVTjtfag-  "having  given  thanks," 
in  Matthew.  Luke  and  Paul  both  say,  "he  gave  thanks," 
sv^ctpifrritfas.  There  is  not  a  syllable  about  his  effecting 
any  change  in  the  bread,  as  Romanists  pretend,  nor  of  his 
making  those  elements  the  conductors  or  means  of  impart- 
ing his  body  to  us.  In  short,  according  to  the  original,  he 
did  not  specifically  bless  the  bread  or  wine,  nor  do  anything 
at  all  to  them.  He  offered  thanks,  as-  it  was  also  customary 
to  do  at  the  beginning  of  the  paschal  supper,  and  as  is  in 
itself  always  appropriate,  and  invoked  the  blessing  of  his 
heavenly  Father  upon  the  whole  ceremony,  of  course,  also 
including  the  elements  employed. 

3.  No  change  had  been  effected  in  the  bread.  It  was 
still  natural  bread,  as  the  Saviour  broke  it;  which  he  would 
not  have  done,  if  his  prayer  had  transubstantiated  it  into  his 
own  body,  or  in  any  way  made  it  the  vehicle  of  his  mate- 
rial body.  It  was  still  natural  bread,  because  the  disciples 
exhibited  no  evidence  of  having  the  least  idea,  that  they 
received  any  thing  but  bread. 

"4.     "He  gave  it  to  them  and  said,   Take,  eat,  this  is  my 
body"  XafStTS  cpaysrs  tovtq  hdri  to  CoSjulci  f*s. 

That  the  literal  interpretation  of  these  words  by  the  Ro- 
manists, as  well  as  several  others,  which,  though  profess- 
edly literal,  are  really  figurative,  and  inconsistent  with  the 
context,  cannot  be  sustained,  we  have  endeavored  to  show 
in  a  former  part  of  this  discussion.  What,  then,  is  their 
true  interpretation?  Let  us,  if  possible,  derive  our  guide 
for  the  true  meaning  of  these  words,  from  the  declarations 
of  the  Saviour  himself,  and  of  his  apostles. 

1.  Let  us  inquire,  Does  the  breaking  of  the  bread  throw 
any  light  upon  our  investigation  ? 

It  must  have  been  done  by  the  Saviour,  so  far  as  we  can 
judge,  from  one  of  two  reasons :  either  because  the  cake, 
or  loaf  of  bread,  was  too  large  to  be  conveniently  handed 
around,  or  because  the  Lord  intended  it  to  possess  some 
significance,  either  symbolic  or  other,  connected  with  the 
design  of  the  whole  institution.  It  seems  not  to  have  been 
the  former,  because  the  bread  was  then,  as  is  still  customary 
among  the  Arabians,  baked  in  cakes  of  moderate  thickness, 
easily  baked  through,  and  convenient  for  breaking.  See 
'Leklensgeschichte   Jesu,'   p.    45.     Stuttgard,    1809.     But 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  145 

that  he  had  another  and  important  design  in  breaking  the 
bread  or  cake,  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  the  Saviour 
expressly  states,  that  this  broken  bread  is,  or  represents  his 
"body  broken"  that  is,  represents  the  breaking  of  his  body, 
his  crucifixion,  or  death  upon  the  cross.  Here  then  we 
have  the  infallible  declaration  of  the  Lord  himself,  that  the 
broken  bread  in  the  eucharist,  represents  the  breaking  or 
crucifixion  of  his  body.  To  represent  this  fact,  the  breaking 
of  the  bread  was  very  appropriate ;  but  to  designate  the  fu- 
ture presence  of  his  glorified  body,  it  would  have  no  signifi- 
cance or  appropriateness  at  all,  The  broken  bread  must  be 
a  representative  of  the  dead,  the  crucified  body,  and  cannot 
in  any  way,  be  designed  to  indicate  the  presence  of  the  liv- 
ing body,  either  glorified  or  not.  The  accuracy  of  this  inter- 
pretation is  confirmed  by  the  fact  of  the  Saviour's  also  men- 
tioning that  the  wine  signified  not  only  his  blood,  which 
would  have  been  sufficient,  if  the  mere  presence  of  the  Lord 
was  to  be  indicated  ;  but  his  blood  "shed,"  the  shedding  of 
his  blood  on  the  cross.  Should  it  be  said,  if  the  breaking 
of  the  bread  was  significant,  then  also  something  should 
have  been  done  to  the  wine,  to  indicate  its  being  shed ;  we 
reply :  This  was  not  necessary.  The  fact  that  his  body 
was  broken,  already  indicates  that  his  blood  was  shed. 
Besides,  the  representation  of  the  blood,  as  separated  from 
the  body,  also  implies  the  same  fact. 

2.  This  is,  or  represents  my  body  "given,"  says  Luke, 
and  "broken,"  says  Paul,  "for  you."  That  by  these  terms, 
"given"  and  "broken"  the  crucifixion  of  the  Lord  is  indi- 
cated, cannot  be  denied,  and  we  believe  is  not.  But  if  the 
Lord  himself  teaches  us,  that  to  represent  his  death  upon 
the  cross,  is  the  object  of  the  Holy  Supper;  then  we  are 
certain  of  being  correct  in  supposing  and  teaching  this  truth; 
and  if  others  suppose  this  ordinance  was  instituted  for  a 
double  purpose,  it  devolves  on  them  to  exhibit  proof  of  the 
other,  in  the  same  way  as  this  is  established,  by  declarations 
of  Christ  or  his  apostles.  Here  the  onus  probandi  most 
justly  lies  on  them,  and  if  they  fail  to  prove  a  second  object, 
then  this  remains  the  only  one,  namely,  to  represent,  in  all" 
coming  time,  that  all-important,  amazing  fact,  which  "angels 
desire  to  look  into,"  the  death  of  the  Son  of  God  upon  the 
cross,  an  event  which  happened  about  eighteen  hundred ' 
years  ao-o.  As  the  Holy  Supper  was  certainly  instituted  to, 
13 


146  THE    NATURE    OF    THE    SAVIOUR'S 

commemorate  this  eternally  important  occurrence,  an  event 
sufficiently  momentous  to  justify,  the  institution  of  a  stand- 
ing rite  for  its  commemoration,  it  is  not  probable  a  priori, 
that  another  very  different  object  (the  presence  of  the  liv- 
ing, glorified  Lord)  would  be  joined  to  it;  and  as  we  find 
no  clear  indication  of  the  fact  in  Scripture,  we  are  compelled 
to  doubt  it. 

If  the  Saviour's  object  had  been  to  represent  the  presence 
of  his  body  in  the  eucharist,  the  bread;  entire  would  have  been 
more  suitable;  and  if,  in  that  event,  he  had  even  broken 
the  paschal  cake  or  bread  merely  incidentally,  there  would 
have  been  no  object  in  his  stating  the  fact.  But  he  him- 
self informs  us,  it  signifies  his  body  "broken"  the  breaking 
of  his  body,  his  crucifixion,  his  death  upon  the  cross.  The 
same  remarks  are  equally  applicable  to  the  language  of  the 
Saviour  in  reference  to  the  wine.  "Take  and  drink,  this  is 
my  blood,"  and  as  Paul  and  Luke  says,  "this  cup  is  the 
New  Covenant  in  my  blood,  'which  is  shed'  for  you — for 
many,  for  the  remission  of  sins."  The  wine,  therefore, 
most  undoubtedly  commemorates  the  shedding  of  the  Sa- 
viour's blood  on  the  cross. 

3.  tlDo  this  in  remembrance  of  me,"  says  the  Saviour, 
according  to  Luke  and  Paul.  Luke  has  rxro  rfoieTrs  sig  -r^v 
s^riv  dvaiAvy}tfiv,  do  this  in  remembrance  or  in  commemoration 
of  me ;  Paul  has  the  same  words,  only  adding,  otfaxis' 
<xv  iflvrirs,  Do  this,  as  often  as  ye  drink  it,  in  remembrance  or 
commemoration  of  me.  Now,  the  very  fact  that  we  are 
called  on  to  do  any  thing  in  remembrance  of  any  person  or 
event,  implies  two  things.  First,  it  presupposes  the  priority 
or  antecedence  of  the  event ;  it  implies  that  the  event  is 
past.  Even  when  we  commemorate  any  actions  of  a  living 
person,  those  actions  must  be  past.  The  very  import  of  the 
word  remember,  necessarily  implies  that  the  thing  to  be  re- 
membered, is  a  something  past.  Again,  the  term  "remem- 
brance" implies  the  absence  of  the  person  or  thing  to  be 
remembered.  When  our  friend  is  with  us,  we  do  not  need 
any  rite  or  ceremony  to  remind  us  of  the  fact.  Nor  can 
we,  in  propriety  of  language,  be  said  to  "remember"  &  pres- 
ent object  or  friend.  The  very  necessity  of  such  a  rite,  it 
our  friend  were  with  us,  would  convey  a  reflection  on  our 
attachment  to  him.  It  is,  when  about  to  separate,  that  friends 
bestow  on  each  other  mementoes ;  or  agree  on  the  stated 


PRESENCE  IN  THE  EUCHARIST.        147 

performance  of  some  act  to  keep  alive  the  remembrance  of 
each  other  during  their  separation.  Now,  both  these  im- 
plications of  the  Saviour's  words,  "Do  this  in  remembrance 
of  me,"  accord  perfectly  with  the  object  of  the  eucharist 
as  explained  by  himself.  At  the  celebration  of  this  stand- 
ing rite  of  the  church,  in  commemoration  of  tbe  breaking 
or  crucifixion  of  his  body,  the  fact  would  be  past,  and  his 
body  would  be  absent.  The  glorious  fact  of  his  atoning 
death  on  the  cross,  would,  from  century  to  century,  be  re- 
ceding farther  and  farther  into  the  past,  and  as  objects  are 
in  danger  of  being  forgotten  in  proportion  as  they  recede 
farther  from  us,  nothing  could  be  more  appropriate  than 
the  institution  of  an  ordinance,  to  keep  alive  in  the  forget- 
ful memory  of  his  disciples,  that  fundamental  fact  in  the 
history  of  redemption,  which  is  the  ground  of  every  be- 
liever's hope,  and  on  which  the  salvation  of  a  world  is  sus- 
pended. 

But,  if  the  design  of  the  eucharist  is  a  two-fold  one  ;  if, 
in  addition  to  the  commemoration  of  the  crucifixion  of  the 
Son  of  God,  that  ordinance  was,  as  some  suppose,  also  ap- 
pointed for  the  purpose  of  commemorating  the  Saviour's 
presence  with  us,  and  the  communication  of  his  body  to  the 
communicant,  the  language,  "in  remembrance  of  me,"  ap- 
pears not  only  strange,  but  inappropriate.  It  would  have 
been  more  natural  for  him  to  say  :  "As  often  as  ye  eat  this 
bread,  and  drink  of  this  cup,  ye  do  celebrate  my  return  to 
your  midst." 

The  Pauline  Interpretation  of  the  Saviour's  Words. 

Such  are  the  intimations  concerning  the  design  of  this 
solemn  ordinance,  furnished  by  the  words  of  the  Saviour 
himself.  If  we  had  no  other,  they  would  incontestibly  es- 
tablish the  fact,  that  it  is  a  mnemonic  rite,  instituted  to  com- 
memorate the  death  of  Christ  on  the  cross.  But  we  have 
still  another  inspired  narrative  of  this  institution,  from  the 
distinguished  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  twenty-four  years 
after  the  establishment  of  this  ordinance,  and  the  ascension 
of  the  Saviour  to  heaven.  1  Cor.  xi.  23-30.  And  what  did 
Paul  regard  as  the  design  of  this  holy  feast  of  love  ? 

1 )  He  also  declares  the  bread  to  stand  related  to  the 
broken  body,  to  signify  the  breaking  of  Christ's  body,  as 


143  THE    NATURE    OF    THE    SAVIOUR'S 

above  intimated.  "  The  Lord  Jesus,  the  same  night  in 
which  he  was  betrayed,  took  bread,  and  when  he  had  given 
thanks,  he  brake  it  and  said,  Take,  eat,  this  is  my  body 
which  is  (or  is  to  be)  broken  for  you." 

2)  He  expressly  pronounces  the  design  of  this  rite  to  be 
mnemonic,  "this  do  in  remembrance  of  me,"  the  force  of 
which  words  we  have  above  illustrated,  as  equivalent  to 
"Do  this  in  order  to  keep  alive  the  recollection  of  a  past 
event  and  of  an  absent  person." 

3)  But  he  adds  two  other  importaut  indications,  which 
are  not  contained  in  the  gospels.  "For  as  often  as  ye  eat 
this  bread  and  drink  this  cup  (the  wine  in  it,)  -tov  ddvarov 
con  xupj's  xa~a.yy£Wsrs  "ye  do  show  forth,  or  publish,  the  death 
of  the  Lord."  Here  then  we  have  the  plain,  literal  decla- 
ration of  the  inspired  Paul,  as  clear  as  language  can  make 
it,  that  the  result  of  the  Holy  Supper  is  to  commemorate, 
not  the  Lord's  presence,  nor  his  bestowing  his  body  and 
blood  on  the  communicants,  but  to  show  forth  the  Lord's 
death,  that  amazing  display  of  divine  love  on  the  cross, 
which  is  the  foundation  fact,  the  central  doctrine  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  the  recollection  and  full  appreciation  of  which, 
is  essential  to  the  Christian  character.  This  declaration  of 
the  Apostle  is  of  incalculable  value.  The  greater  portion 
of  the  language  of  Christ  is  or  may  be  figurative,  and,  there- 
fore, admits  of  a  diversity  of  interpretations,  and  it  may  re- 
main questionable  which  is  their  true  sense.  But  this  lan- 
guage of  Paul  is  literal,  nothing  figurative  about  it,  and, 
therefore,  in  its  import  all  agree.  All  admit  that  he  designs 
to  say,  as  often  as  ye  celebrate  this  Holy  Supper,  ye  com- 
memorate, perpetuate  the  memory  of,  revive  your  recollec- 
tion of  the  death  of  Jesus  on  the  cross. 

It  is  certain,  then,  that  this  was  the  object  of  the  Saviour 
in  this  sacred  institution.  It  is  certain,  also,  that,  in  the 
view  of  Paul,  this  was  its  great  and  principal  design,  if  not 
its  only  one.  And  it  is  probable,  that  he  regarded  it  as  the 
only  one,  since  he  mentions  no  other.  The  expressions  from 
which  some  would  deduce  another  design,  "  are  not  the  bread 
and  wine  the  communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ," 
have  been  explained  above,  we  think,  satisfactorily.  They 
teach  that  the  bread  and  wine  bring  us  into  solemn,  spiritual, 
mental  communion,  or  recollection  of,  and  reflection  on  the 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST.  149 

Saviour's  body  and  blood,  broken  and  shed  for  us  on  the 
cross. 

4)  But  this  illustrious  apostle  adds  another  expression 
calculated  to  reflect  light  on  this  subject.  He  adds,  "Ye 
do  show  forth  the  Lord's  death,"  ayjig  ov  tXdri,  ''until  he 
come."  This  solemn  declaration  clearly  teaches  three  facts  ; 
first,  that  the  Lord  is  himself  absent  at  the  celebration  of 
the  supper,  as  well  as  generally  after  his  ascension ;  and 
secondly,  that  he  will  continue  absent  personally,  as  long  as 
the  supper  is  to  be  commemorated ;  and  thirdly,  when  he 
comes,  his  personal  presence  Avill  supercede  the  necessity  of 
any  further  observance  of  a  commemorative  ordinance. 

About  twenty-four  years  had  elapsed  since  Jesus  had  as- 
cended to  heaven.  In  the  mean  time  he  had  been  seen  by 
no  one  of  all  his  friends  or  enemies  on  earth.  Whether  he 
had  appeared  unto  Paul,  fourteen  years  before  this  time, 
when  wrapped  in  holy  vision,  he  was  elevated  to  the  third 
heavens,  Paul  does  not  state  :  yet  it  is  highly  probable. 
Once,  he  had  certainly  seen  him,  during  his  journey  to  Da- 
mascus. But  then  he  appeared  to  him  in  the  clouds  of 
heaven,  evidently  from  another  world.  At  other  times  he 
received  special  communications  from  him,  but  it  is  not  -cer- 
tain that  he  again  appeared  to  him  personally.  All  the  ex- 
perience of  the  Apostle  therefore,  had  connected  the  present 
residence  or  local  existence  and  manifestation  of  the  Saviour 
with  another  world,  and  taught  him  that  Christ  was  absent. 

These  words  of  Paul  also  imply,  that  so  long  as  it  is  obli- 
gatory on  Christians  to  celebrate  this  holy  feast,  the  Saviour 
will  continue  absent;  for  they  are  commanded  to  repeat  its 
celebration  often,  until  he  comes;  which  involves  the  conse- 
quence, that  when  he  does  come,  this  celebration  shall  cease. 
And  finally,  as  this  celebration,  or  commemoration  of  the 
Saviour's  death,  is  to  cease  on  his  personal  return  to  earth, 
it  seems  a  natural  supposition,  that  it  was  appointed  to  pre- 
serve in  constant  memory  something,  which  in  his  absence 
we  would  be  prone  to  forget;  and  Paul  tells  us,  this  was 
the  grand  and  cardinal  fact  in  his  mediatorial  career,  his  vi- 
carious death  upon  the  eross  for  the  sins  of  the  world. 

Since  it  is  certain  that  the  commemoration  of  the  Lord's 
death  is  the  object  of  the  sacramental  institution,  the  ques- 
tion arises,  whether  there  is  any  reason  to  suppose,  that  the 
Lord  had  a  double  object  in  view.  The  only  arguments  in 
13a 


150       THE  NATURE  OF  THE  SAVIOUR'S 

! 

support  of  such  a  supposition  are  found  in  the  supposed  ne- 
cessity of  a  literal  interpretation  of  the  phrase  touto  s(f<rt  ro 
tfo^aa  jxou,  "  this  is  my  body,"  and  the  phrase  of  Paul,  1  Cor. 
x.  16  ;  ou^i  (to  rforripiov')  xoivuvlarx  tfw^a-ro^  rx  Xpitfrou  scfrt  ; 
"is  it  not  (the  cup)  the  communion  of  the  blood  of  Christ?" 
&c,  xai  rov  aprov,  ou^i  xojvwv/arouCob.aarog-ToO'Xpitf-rou  etfn ;  and 
"the  bread,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ?" 
But  as  we  have  already  proved,  that  the  literal  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Romanists  is  utterly  untenable ;  and  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  real  presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
"in,  with,  or  under"  the  elements,  is  not  a  literal  one,  but 
figurative  and  unnatural,  and  at  the  same  time,  liable  to 
many  of  the  objections,  on  account  of  which  all  Protestants 
repudiate  the  Romish  literal  interpretation,  we  need  not  re- 
peat them.  And  having  already  presented  our  view  of  the 
import  of  the  term  xjMvttvia  "  communion,"  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  the  only  thing  which  remains,  in  order  to 
vindicate  the  Pauline  interpretation,  which  we  adopt  as  our 
own,  namely,  the  mnemonic  import  of  the  rite,  its  appoint- 
ment to  perpetuate  the  memory  of  the  Lord's  death  or  cru- 
cifixion, is  to  show  that  this  figurative  or  tropical  interpre- 
tation of  the  phrase  toj-o  Ictj  to  &upu  fjwu,  "  this  is  my 
body,"  is  perfectly  sustained  by  the  usus  loquendi  of  the 
New  Testament. 

a)  Even  those  who  receive  the  doctrine  of  the  real 
presence,  concede  that  these  words  do  admit  of  the  figura- 
tive meaning  for  which  we  contend.  The  learned  and  pious 
Dr.  Storr  remarks:  "The  words  of  our  Lord,  '  This  is  my 
body,'  &c,  may  indeed  be  explained  figuratively  without 
violence  to  the  usus  loquendi  of  the  New  Testament.  The 
figure  assumed  would  not  be  an  uncommon  one.  Nor  can 
it  be  said  that  the  nature  of  the  case  altogether  forbids  the 
supposition  of  the  language  being  figurative.  For  it  cannot 
be  denied  that  some  of  the  language  used  in  the  institution 
of  the  Holy  Supper  is  figurative,  (tropical.")1  Nor  is  this 
admission  made  without  cause.  The  reasons  sustaining  this 
opinion  are  numerous  and  most  satisfactory. 

b)  The  Hebrew  language  does  not  contain  a  word  to 
express    the    idea,    signify,    and    therefore    the    Hebrews 

(1)  Storr's  Biblical  Theology,  §  114,  111.  6,  p.  537  of  2d  ed.  of  the 
translation. 


PRESENCE    IB    THE    EUCHARIST.  151 

always  conveyed  that  idea  by  other  terms,  usually  by  the 
substantive  verb,  "TJi,  to  be.  Or  perhaps,  more  frequently 
the  phrase  is  elliptical,  and  the  verb  entirely  wanting,  and 
to  be  supplied  from  the  context.  But  the  inspired  evan- 
gelists have  given  us  the  verb  gtfn,  "is";  and  it  is  the  usus 
loquendi  of  the  New  Testament,  in  regard  to  this  term,  that 
we  are  to  investigate. 

c)  That  this  method  of  using  the  term  "is"  for  "signi- 
fies," is  a  very  common  one  among  different  nations,  is  well 
known,  and  the  idiom  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  is,  in 
this  respect,  the  same.  Thus,  it  was  customary  for  the 
Jews,  when  interrogated  by  their  children  concerning  the 
import  of  the  Passover,  to  reply  :  "  This  is  the  body  of  the 
Lamb  which  our  fathers  ate  in  Egypt,"  that  is,  it  signifies 
the  lamb,  &c.  The  Psalmist  says,  (Ps.  xviii.  2:)  The 
Lord  is  my  rock  and  my  fortress — is  my  buckler — is  the 
horn  of  my  salvation — is  my  high  tower.  Ps.  xxiii.  1. 
The  Lord  is  my  shepherd,  &c.  &c. 

But  the  Scriptures  abound  in  cases  of  the  very  same 
figure,  which  we  are  now  considering.  Gen.  xl.  12. 
Joseph  says,  "the  three  branches  are  three  days,  i.  e.  sig- 
nify three  days.  xli.  26.  The  seven  good  kine  are  seven 
years.  Danl.  vii.  24.  "  The  ten  horns  out  of  this  kingdom 
are  ten  kings  that  shall  rise."  v.  17.  "  These  great  beasts 
which  are  four,  are  four  kings."  viii.  21.  "And  the  rough 
goat  is  the  king  of  Greece."  In  all  the  above  cases,  though 
the  language  is  elliptical,  the  substantive  verb  is  understood, 
which  is  expressed  in  our  English  Bible.  Paul  says, 
(1  Cor.  x.  4,)  "That  rock  (that  followed  the  Israelites  in 
the  wilderness)  was  ($v)  Christ."  Gal.  iv.  24.  "For 
these  (Sarah  and  Hagar)  are  (sitfjv)  the  two  covenants," 
i.  e.  signify  them.  Luke  xii.  1.  "Beware  of  the  leaven 
of  the  Pharisees  r,rlr  grfrjv  which  is  (signifies)  hypocrisy." 
Heb.  vii.  2.  "King  of  Salem,  o  gp,  that  is  (signifies)  king 
of  peace."  Mark  iv.  15.  And  these  are  the}7  by  the  way- 
side— and  on  stony  ground, — among  thorns,  <fcc,  that  is, 
these  represent  or  signify  them.  2  Peter  ii.  17.  These 
(the  false  prophets)  are,  that  is,  sig-nify,  wells  without 
water. 

Bat,  did  the  Saviour  himself  employ  such  figurative  lan- 
guage, in  reference-  to  himself,  on  any  other  occasion  than 
at  the   sacramental  supper  ?     lie  doubtless  did  on  various 


152      THE  NATURE  OF  THE  SAVIOUR'S 

occasions.  John  v.  11,  14.  I  am  the  good  shepherd. 
vi.  35,  41,  48,  51.  I  am  the  bread  of  life,  i\d  sl^ii  6  a.prog. 
viii.  12.  I  am  the  light  of  the  world,  hyU  Ij.ui  to  <pws  row 
xotf/xo-j.  x.  7,  9.  I  am  (s/w  l/fw)  the  cfoor  of  the  sheep — 
"lam  the  door."  xiv.  6.  I  am  the  way,  the  truth  and  the 
life.  xv.  1,  2.  I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the  branches.  I  am 
the  resurrection  and  the  life — I  am  the  Alpha  and  Omega, 
the  beginning  and  the  end.  Here,  then,  we  perceive  that 
the  Saviour  was  in  the  habit  of  speaking  of  himself  in  this 
tropical  manner,  calling  himself  bread,  a  shepherd,  a  door. 
:That  he  should  also  compare  his  body  to  bread  and  his 
blood  to  wine,  is,  therefore,  perfectly  accordant  with  his 
habits;  and  the  figurative  use  of  the  phrase  "this  is,'* 
rouro  t-r-ri,  is  perfectly  accordant  with  the  usus  loquendi, 
and  therefore  we  are  at  perfect  liberty,  according  to  the 
sound  principles  of  interpretation,  to  give  to  there  words, 
"this  is  my  body,"  this  is  my  blood,"  the  meaning,  signifies 
my  body,  signifies  my  blood,  as  required  by  the  design  of 
the  ordinance,  as  taught  by  Paul  and  by  the  Saviour 
himself,  namely,  to  show  forth  the  Lord's  death  until  he 
come. 

In  view  of  all  these  facts,  it  seems  evident  that  the  words 
of  the  sacramental  institution  as  uttered  by  the  Saviour,  re- 
corded by  the  evangelists,  and  explained  by  Paul,  are  to  be 
understood,  so  far  as  the  mode  of  the  Saviour's  presence  is 
concerned,  as  follows: 

"And  as  they  were  eating,  (the  paschal  supper,)  Jesus 
took  bread,  (the  unleavened  bread  or  cake  which  had  been 
prepared  for  the  passover, )  and  having  given  thanks  and 
pronounced  a  blessing,  he  gave  the  pieces  of  bread  to  his 
disciples,  and  said,  Take,  eat,  this  (bread,  which  is  and  re- 
mains bread  and)  signifies  my  (natural,  not  glorified)  body, 
which  is  (to  be)  broken  for  you,  (on  the  cross,  crucified,) 
do  this  in  (order  to  cherish  the)  remembrance  of  me. 
Likewise,  he  took  the  cup,  after  (the  paschal)  supper  (was 
ended,)  avid  when  he  had  given  thanks,  he  gave  it  to  them 
saying.  Drink  ye  all  of  it,  (of  the  wine,  which  was  ordinary 
wine,  that  had  been  prepared  for  the  Passover;)  This  cup 
(the  wine  in  it)  is  (signifies  or  represents)  the  new  testa- 
ment in  my  blood  (represents  the  new  covenant  ratified  by 
my  bio  which  is  (to  be)   shed  (on   the  cross)  for  you, 

and  foi  y  for  the  remission  of  sins.     This  do  ye  as  often 


PRESENCE    IN    THE   EUCHARIST.  153 

as  ye  drink  it,  in  (order  to  cherish  the)  remembrance  of 
me.  For  as  often  as  ye  (reverently  and  devoutly)  eat  this 
bread  and  drink  the  wine  in  this  cup  (consecrated  by 
prayer  for  the  sacramental  celebration)  ye  do  show  forth 
(perpetuate  the  memory  of)  the  Lord's  death,  (upon  the 
cross,)  until  he  returns,  (at  the  latter  day,  at  the  close  of 
the  present  dispensation.)  Whoever  shall  eat  this  bread 
and  drink  this  wine  unworthily,  (irreverently  and  without 
faith  and  a  due  regard  for  the  solemn  design  for  which  they 
were  appointed,)  is  guilty  (in  respect  to  the)  body  and 
blood  of  the  Lord,  (guilty  of  treating  irreverently  or  pro- 
fanely the  emblems  or  memorials  of  the  Saviour's  broken 
body  and  shed  blood,  and  thus  guilty  of  casting  reproach 
on  the  Lord  himself.)  Let  a  man,  therefore,  examine  him- 
self (as  to  his  knowledge  of  the  design  of  the  institution 
and  his  moral  qualifications  to  receive  it;)  for  he  that 
eateth  or  drinketh  unworthily  (in  an  irreverent  manner  and 
without  faith  in  Christ,)  eateth  and  drinketh  (judgment, 
xpraa,  not)  damnation  to  himself,  not  discerning  the  Lord's  , 
body,  (not  distinguishing  between  ordinary  bread  and  these 
elements,  instituted  and  consecrated  as  emblems  of  the 
Saviour's  crucified  body  and  blood.) 

According  to  this  view  of  the  sacramental  narrative,  it 
follows,  that  in  the  Holy  Supper  of  our  Lord,  there  is, 

1.  A  real  presence  of  the  Saviour  as  to  his  divine  nature. 

2.  A  spiritual,  that  is  symbolic  presence  as  to  his  human 
nature,  and, 

3.  An  influential  presence  of  the  God-man,  the  Thean- 
thropos  (dsavd^wrfos)  as  to  the  blessings  flowing  from  his 
death  and  mediatorial  work  in  general. 

Hence,  the  view  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  which  is  most 
scriptural,  and  also  most  generally  received  by  the  great 
majority  of  the  Lutheran  ministry  and  churches  in  this 
country,  is  summarily  the  following:  * 

That  there  is  no  real  or  actual  presence  of  the  glorified  hu- 
man nature  of  the  Saviour  either  substantial  or  influential,  nor 
any  thing  mysterious  or  supernatural  in  the  eucharist ;  yet, 
that  whilst  the  bread  and  wine  are  merely  symbolical  represen- 
tations of  the  Saviour's  absent  body,  by  ivhich  we  are  reminded 
of  his  sufferings,  there  is  also  a  peculiar  and  special  spir- 
itual blessing  bestowed  by  the  divine  Saviour  on  all  worthy 
communicants,  by  which  their  faith  and  Christian  graces  are 


Ajr-fc 


154     SAVIOUR'S    PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST. 

confirmed.1  The  further  development  of  the  nature  and  evi- 
dences of  the  various  blessings  resulting  from  this  ordinance, 
does  not  fall  within  the  design  of  the  present  discussion. 
We  will  in  few  words  merely  add,  on  this  interesting  and 
highly  practical  subject,  that  whilst  the  nature  of  this  ordi- 
nance, so  far  as  the  Saviour's  person  and  its  presence  are 
concerned,  is  merely  commemorative  or  mnemonic,  its  influ- 
ence and  general  relations  are  by  no  means  exhausted  by  this 
term.  The  Holy  Supper  is  indeed  a  mnemonic  ordinance, 
but  it  is  also  much  more.     In  addition  to  its  character  as 

'  1.  A  mnemonic  or  commemorative  ordinance  ;  the  Scriptures  authorize  us 
to  regard  it  also. 

2.  As  a  federal  ordinance.  It  has  a  federal  or  covenant  character.  "  This  cup 
said  the  Saviour,  is,  or  signifies  the  New  Covenant  (Testament)  in  my  Mood." 
This  ordinance  represents  the  covenant  of  grace,  the  plan  of  salvation  ratified 
by  my  blood,  and  fully  set  forth  in  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
■  3.  It  is  a  professing  ordinance.  In  it  we  publicly  profess  not  only  our  be- 
lief in  the  vicarious  atonement  through  the  Saviour's  blood,  "broken,"  "  shed 
for  many  ;"  but  also  profess  anew  our  having  accepted  the  offers  of  mercy, 
based  on  this  doctrine. 

|  4.  It  is  a  sacramental  ordinance,  in  the  original  sense  of  the  term  sacrament 
an  oath.  By  it  christians  renew  their  oath,  or  vow  of  fidelity  to  their  Saviour 
made  at  their  reception  into  the  church,  adding  new  strength  to  the  obligation 
by  their  voluntary  act. 

5.  It  is  a  collative  ordinance.    It  professes  not  only  what  theologians  term 
a^aiwaig-nifioatkyn,  a  symbolic  influence  ;  but  also  a  vim  collatinn*,  a  colla- 
tive influence.    That  is,  it  not  only   possesses  a  significative  import,  it  is 
•#*••••        also  the  means  through  which  the  divine  Saviour  actually  bestows  a  special, 
spiritual  blessing  on  all  worthy  communicants. 

i  6.  It  is  a  eucharistic  ordinance,  because  it  is  a  feast  of  gratitude  to  the  Re- 
deemer for  the  rich  blessings  purchased  by  his  death,  and  secured  to  worthy 
partakers  of  this  ordinance.  The  name  is  derived  from  SUyaPJUTi'a,  giving 
of  thanks.  Matthew  26  :  27.  Luke  :  22  19.  1  Cor.  11  :  24. 
I  7.  It  is  a  communing  ordinance.  It  brings  us  into  communion,  not  only  spir- 
itually with  the  crucified  body  of  Christ  ;  but  also  with  all  true  believers,  who 
unite  with  us  in  the  ordinance  ;  and  even  spiritually  with  christians  elsewhere, 
who  partake  of  the  same  ordinance.  It  is  the  means  of  congregational  and  of 
catholic  communion.  "  For,"  says  Paul,  1  Corinthians,  11 :  17.  "  we  being 
many  are  one  bread  and  one  body  ;  for  we  are  all  partakers  of  that  one  bread." 

Having  thus  presented  the  view  of  the  Saviour's  pres- 
ence in  the  Holy  Supper,  which  we  find  clearly  taught  in  the 
records  of  inspiration,  we  close  with  the  remark,  that  whilst 
we  vindicate  to  ourselves  the  right  to  believe  and  profess 
what  we  regard  as  the  scriptural  view  of  this  subject,  we 
consider  the  Protestant  diversities  in  reference  to  it  as  of 
minor  moment,  and  can  cordially  fraternize  with  the  Zwing- 
lian  and  all  others  on  the  one  hand,  who  attribute  to  this 
ordinance  no  peculiar  spiritual  blessing,  beyond  that  of  the 
other  means  of  grace,  and  with  the  rigid  adherent  of  Lu- 
ther's views  on  the  other,  who  believes  in  the  real  presence, 
the  eating  and  drinking  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Re- 
deemer in  this  Holy  Feast  of  Love. 

(1)  Popular  Theology,  5th  ed.,  p.  303. 


T.    DISCOURSE. 

THE  DOCTRINAL  BASIS  AND  ECCLESIASTICAL  POSITION  OF 
THE  AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH. 


CHAPTER  I. 


Introductory  remarks.  Propositions  defining  the  doc- 
trinal basis.  The  name  Lutheran — It  is  given  to  many 
who  reject  the  majority  or  the  '•'  symbolical  books." 

One  of  the  characteristic  features  of  the  Christian  church, 
by  which  the  -wisdom  and  benevolence  of  its  Divine  Author 
are  illustriously  displayed,  is  found  in  the  fact,  that,  whilst 
he  himself  projected  the  fundamental  lineaments  of  its  exter- 
nal, visible  organization,  he  left  the  great  mass  of  minor 
features,  to  be  filled  up  by  the  discretion  of  his  disciples  in 
the  successive  ages  of  the  world.  It  was  thus,  that  the  di- 
vine truths  of  his  holy  religion  found,  comparatively,  easy 
access  to  the  human  heart,  under  all  forms  of  civil  organi- 
zation. For  whilst  it  taught  kings  and  emperors  to  rule  in 
righteousness,  "to  be  a  terror  to  evil-doers,  and  a  praise 
to  those  that  do  well,"  it  simultaneously  enjoined  on  those 
"under  authority,"  to  be  "subject  to  the  powers  that  be," 
as  "to  the  ministers  of  God,  who  hold  not  the  sword  ia 
vain;"  because  civil  government  is  an  institution  "ap- 
pointed of  God."  Under  the  sanction  of  this  discretionaiy 
principle,  we  find  not  only  different  denominations  of  Chris- 


156  INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS. 

tians,  characterized  by  diversity  of  externa]  polity,  but  even 
Christians  of  the  same  denomination,  in  different  countries, 
admit  of  these  variations.  Thus,  the  adherents  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  the  XVth  article  of  which  sanctions  this  prin- 
ciple of  diversity  in  external  arrangements,  designed  to 
"promote  peace  and  good  order  in  the  church"  though  all 
designated  by  the  general  name  of  Lutheran,  or  Evangelical, 
are  characterized  by  strongly  marked  diversities  of  organi- 
zation and  polity.  For  example,  whilst  all  Lutherans  of 
every  land,  acknowledge  the  primitive  parity  of  ministers, 
in  Denmark  our  church  has  diocesan  bishops,  and  in  Sweden 
also  an  archbishop  ;  whilst  in  Germany  she  has  superin- 
tendents, and  in  republican  America,  adheres  to  entire  pa- 
rity of  ministerial  rank  in  practice,  as  well  as  in  theory.  In 
like  manner,  whilst  in  Luther's  lifetime,  no  symbolical  books 
at  all,  except  the  Bible,  were  imposed  on  either  pastors  or 
churches ;  after  his  death,  several  important  documents  of 
historical  importance,  all  (except  the  Form  of  Concord,) 
written  for  other  purposes,  were  prescribed  by  the  civil  au- 
thorities, as  binding  on  both  pastors  and  churches.  After 
this  system  of  symbolic  servitude  had  been  commenced, 
more  books  were  invested  with  such  authority  in  Saxony, 
than  in  some  other  sections  of  Germany.  In  Sweden,  none 
of  these  modern  documents  were  regarded  as  strictly  sym- 
bolical, except  the  Augsburg  Confession  ;  and  in  Denmark, 
none  but  that  Confession,  and  the  Smaller  Catechism  of  Lu- 
ther. The  Lutheran  Church  in  America,  though  pursuing 
some  diversity  in  practice,  never  entered  on  a  formal  settle- 
ment of  this  point,  until  the  General  Synod  virtually  ac- 
complished this  end,  in  her  Synodical  Constitution,  by  the 
requisition  of  fundamental  assent  to  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
from  all  candidates  for  licensure  and  ordination.  That 
Lutherans  in  this  country  Avould  not  be  insensible,  either  to 
their  inalienable  rights  or  obligations,  that  they  would  avail 
themselves  of  our  happy  liberty  from  all  entangling  alliances 
with  the  civil  government,  and  organize  their  church  more 
closely,  according  to  the  Apostolic  model,  than  could  be  done 
in  Germany,  was  natural  and  right.  Accordingly,  like  their 
brethren  of  other  denominations,  our  fathers  did  introduce 
various  improvements  on  the  ecclesiastical  institutions  of  Lu- 
theran" Europe,  and  adopt  a  system,  which,  whilst  it  is  Lu- 
theran, is  also  American,  and  more  nearly  conformed  to  the 


DOCTRINAL    BASIS    STATED.  157 

Apostolic  model,  than  has  been  attained  by  the  Lutheran 
church  in  any  other  country. 

To  portray  the  practice  of  our  Fathers,  the  principles  on 
which  they  acted,  and  the  organization  which  has  gradually 
grown  out  of  them,  is  the  design  of  this  article  ;  as  well  as  to 
vindicate  them  against  the  objections,  which  may  arise  in  the 
minds  of  our  friends  or  foes.  As  the  subject  is  possessed 
of  a  high,  enduring  interest,  these  discussions,  which  first  ap- 
peared in  the  Lutheran  Observer,  are  now  present,  m  this 
permanent  and  condensed  form,  entirely  dives+&c  of  the  pe- 
culiarities in  which  they  originated  ;  and  th?~  are  circulated, 
not  to  provoke  controversy,  but  to  present  calm,  rational  and 
scriptural  argument,  for  the  conscientious  consideration  of 
those  concerned,  with  the  supplication  and  the  hope  that  a 
gracious  Providence  may  employ  them  to  cherish  peace  and 
harmony  within  our  borders,  to  promote  a  Scriptural  organ- 
ization of  the  Church  on  earth,  and  to  hasten  her  triumph 
over  the  kingdoms  of  this  world. 

We  shall  devote  the  present  chapter  to  a  statement  of  the 
propositions  to  be  discussed,  and  to  several  general  and  pre- 
liminary topics. 

The  doctrinal  basis  and  ecclessiastical  position  of  the 
American  Lutheran  Church,  may  be  briefly  comprehended 
in  the  following  propositions : 

1.  The  patriarchs  of  our  church  did  at  first  practically 
profess  the  former  symbolical  books  of  our  church  in  Germany, 
by  avowing  them  or  in  most  instances  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession at  the  erection  of  their  houses  of  worship,  and  in 
various  cases  at  the  induction  of  men  into  the  ministerial 
office. 

2.  They  soon  relaxed  from  the  rigor  of  symbolic  requisi- 
tion, and  referred  only  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  generally 
omitting  all  reference  to  the  other  former  symbolic  books, 
except  the  use  of  the  Smaller  Catechism  of  Luther  in  the 
instruction  of  the  rising  generation. 

3.  Neither  they  nor  their  immediate  successors  ever  for- 
mally adopted  these  symbolical  books  as  binding  on  ou? 
church  in  this  country,  as  tests  of  admission  or  discipline. 

4.  About  the  beginning  of  this  century  they  ceased,  in 
fact,  to  require  assent  even  to  the  Augsburg  Confession  at 
licensure  and  ordination,  and  demanded  only  faith  in  tha 
word  of  God,  thus  practicallv  rejecting  (as  they  had  a  right 

14 


153  DOCTRINAL   BASIS    STATED. 

to  do)  all  the  symbolical  books  as  tests ;  though  still  respect- 
ing and  occasionally  referring  to  the  Augsburg  confession  as 
a  substantial  expose  of  the  doctrines  which  they  taught. 

5.  The  actual  doctrinal  position  of  our  church  in  this 
country  at  the  formation  of  the  General  Synod,  was  that  of 
adherence  to  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Scripture  as  sub- 
stantially taught  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  with  acknowl- 
edged dissent  on  minor  points.  Eeclessiastical  obligations 
are  voluntary  and  personal,  not  hereditary.  God  deals  with 
every  man  as  an  individual  moral  agent,  possessing  certain 
unalienable  rights,  and  owing  certain  unalienable  duties. 
Hence  the  ministry  and  laity,  that  is,  the  church  of  every 
age  have  as  good  a  right  and  are  as  much  under  obligations 
to  oppose,  and,  if  possible,  change  what  they  believe  wrong 
in  the  religious  practices  of  their  predecessors,  and  to  con- 
form it  to  the  word  of  God,  as  were  Luther  and  the  other 
christians  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

6.  Whatever  moral  obligation  their  practical  requisition  of 
assent  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  may  have  imposed  on 
themselves  and  those  thus  admitted  by  them,  it  was  annulled 
when,  by  common  consent,  they  revoked  that  practice. 
And  as  none,  so  far  as  we  have  ever  heard,  protested  or 
seceded,  they  thus  all  practically  rejected  all  those  books  as 
binding  symbols. 

7.  Our  General  Synod  found  the  Lutheran  Church  in 
America  without  any  human  symbols  as  tests  of  admission 
or  discipline,  although  the  Augsburg  Confession  was  still 
occasionally  referred  to  as  a  substantial  exhibition  of  the 
doctrines  held  by  them  ;  and  the  General  Synod  ratified  the 
state  of  doctrine  existing  among  its  members,  namely,  fun- 
damental assent  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  with  acknowl- 
edged deviation  in  minor  or  non-fundamental  points,  and 
subsequently  passed  a  formal  adoption  of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, in  this  fundamental  way,  as  a  test  of  admission  and 
discipline. 

The  American  Lutheran  Church  is  characterized  by  cer- 
tain definite  features,  and  as  such  is  worthy  of  the  highest 
respect  and  confidence  of  her  membership,  and  of  the 
Christian  public  at  large. 

In  regard  to  our  first  ])osition,  namely,  that  our  earliest 
preachers  often  referred  to  the  symbolical  books,  a.nd  especially 
to  the  Augsburg  Confession  as  an  expose  of  their  doctrinal 


DOCTRINAL    BASIS    STATED,  159 

views,  no  doubt  can  exist,  and  therefore  an  induction  of 
proofs  is  superfluous.  And  yet  it  seems  evident  that  in  thus 
referring,  they  did  not  design  to  profess  an  absolute  con- 
formity ;  because  they  had  certainly  rejected  several  of  the 
tenets  of  those  books,  which  are  also  at  present  generally 
rejected,  such  as  auricular  confession,  which  is  taught  in 
the  Augsburg  Confession,  Article  xi :  "  Concerning  Confes- 
sion we  teach  that  private  absolution  must  be  retained  in 
the  churches  and  must  not  be  abandoned,"  and  also  Exorcism, 
which  is  enjoined  in  the  Directory  for  Baptism,  (Taufbuech- 
lein,)  appended  by  Luther  himself  to  his  Smaller  Cate- 
chism, where  we  find  on  the  subject  of  Baptism,  the  following 
directions  :  Let  the  officiating  minister  say  :  Depart  (or  come 
out,  'fahre  aus')  thou  unclean  spirit,  and  give  room  to  the  Holy 
Spirit,"  and  after  a  prayer  the  minister  says:  "I adjure  thee, 
thou  unclean  spirit,  by  (bei)  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  thou  come  out  and  depart  from 
this  servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  N.N  (naming  the  child)  Amen." 
All  these  things  are  omitted  from  the  liturgies  and  catechisms 
published  by  our  earlier  ministers,  that  we  have  seen.  We 
know,  too,  that  some  of  them,  such  as  Dr.  Kunze,  rejected  the 
imputation  of  Adam's  sin,  or  rather  of  the  depraved  nature 
which  we  derived  from  him,  to  his  'posterity  as  personal  guilt; 
and  from  the  general  tenor  of  Muhlenberg's  theological  views, 
we  doubt  not  he  and  others  of  them  participated  in  this  rejec- 
tion. Now  these  are  the  principal  points,  with  the  addition  of 
the  bodily  presence  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  which  the 
friends  of  the  "General  Synod's  basis,"  or  of  the  "Ameri- 
can Lutheran  church,"  object  to  in  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, (and  exorcism  is  not  even  taught  in  that  book)  ;  and 
we  are  greatly  mistaken  if  one  in  five  hundred  of  our  Amer- 
ican Lutherans  will  ever  adopt  the  views  of  Luther  on  these 
subjects.  But  if  the  early  fathers  of  our  church  in  this 
country  had  formally  adopted  the  whole  mass  of  the  books 
as  symbolical  and  binding  on  all  future  generations,  (which 
they  did  not,)  the  writer's  views  of  his  own  position  in  the 
Lutheran  church,  and  of  his  duty  in  regard  to  her,  as  well 
as  that  of  his  brethren  of  the  General  Synod,  would  not  be 
changed  in  the  least.     His  reasons  are  these : 

Religious  and  ecclesiastical  obligations  are  not  hereditary. 
In  matters  not  prescribed  by  the  word  of  God,  I  am  bound 
by  no  other  obligations  than  those  which  I  personally  as- 


160  LUTHER    NO    SYMBOLIST. 

sumed.  I  was  not  even  requested  to  pledge  myself  to  any 
one  of  the  symbolical  books  on  entering  the  ministry,  but  to 
the  inspired  and  infallible  word  of  God.  If  subscription  to 
the  symbolical  books  is  essential  to  the  character  of  a  Lu- 
theran, then  Luther  himself  was  not  a  member  of  the  church 
that  bore  his  name;  and  a  large  part  of  all  who  were  called 
Lutherans  during  the  first  half  century  of  her  existence, 
were  in  the  same  condition,  as  well  as  all  those  entire  Lu- 
theran countries,  which  always  rejected  the  ill-fated  Form 
of  Concord.  The  friends  of  the  General  Synod's  basis 
believed  themselves  acting  honestly,  and  honorably  in  join- 
ing the  church,  then  as  now  called  Lutheran  ;  because  they 
believed  and  still  believe  and  teach  all  the  great  and  cardinal 
doctrines  which  Luther  taught,  and  carry  out  more  fully 
than  he  did,  the  principles  of  church  government  and 
discipline,  which  he  believed  to  be  taught  in  Scripture. 

Again,  if  the  founders  of  the  American  Lutheran  church 
even  had  formally  adopted  the  symbolical  books  of  Germany, 
it  was  equally  competent  for  their  successors  to  rescind  such 
adoption ;  and  certainly  could  not  affect  our  duty  and  position. 
It  is  enough  for  us,  and  for  the  present  generation  of  our 
ministers  and  members,  that  when  we  entered  the  holy  of- 
fice, no  such  obligation  was  customary  or  even  thought  of; 
no  pledge  to  the  symbolical  books,  or  any  one  of  them,  was 
asked  of  us,  or  given  by  us.  We  selected  the  Lutheran 
church  as  the  church  of  our  choice,  as  she  then  was,  not  as 
she  had  been  two  or  three  centuries  ago.  And,  as  honest 
and  honorable  men,  we  are  answerable  for  our  fidelity  only 
to  the  promises  which  we  ourselves  made,  so  long  as  we  do 
not  publicly  renonunce  them,  and  avow  a  change  of  opinion 
as  to  our  duty;  as  Luther  did  when  he  repudiated  the  ob- 
ligation of  his  monastic  vows.  It  is  certain  our  American 
fathers  did  not  formally  adopt  these  books,  but  in  several 
instances  practically  required  assent  to  them  at  licensure  or 
ordination,  and  probable  for  some  years  longer,  as  we  have 
recently  been  informed  by  one  of  the  oldest  fathers  of  the 
church,  required  candidate's  assent  to  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession alone,  practically  rejecting  the  other  books  ;  and  they 
did  recommend  the  smaller  catechism  of  Luther  as  a  book  for 
catechetical  instruction ;  but  their  successors  gradually  dis- 
approving of  this  pledge,  practically  rejected  it,  as  well  as 


OUR    FATHERS    NOT    RIGID    SYMBOLISTS.      161 

any  pledge  to  the  other  symbolic  books,  about  half  a  cen- 
tury ago,  which  they  had  a  perfect  moral  right  to  do. 

All  the  while,  those  venerable  brethren,  among  whom 
were  Drs.  Kunze,  Helmuth,  Schmidt,  Streit,  Schaeffer  of 
Philadelphia,  Muhlenberg  of  Lancaster,  Daniel  Kurtz  of 
Baltimore,  Krug,  Endress,  Goering,  Schmucker  of  York, 
and  Lochman,  Sen'r.,  though  they  no  longer  required  the 
licentiate  to  pledge  himself  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  yet 
still  adhering  to  the  grand  doctrines  held  by  Luther,  con- 
sidered it  honorable  to  retain  the  name  of  Lutheran,  as 
their  successors  still  do.  Dr.  Helmuth  is  known  to  have 
been  prominent  in  rejecting  the  requisition  of  a  pledge  to 
the  Augsburg  Confession.  Whether  all  the  others,  above 
named  agreed  with  him,  we  know  not;  yet  the  majority- 
must  have  done  so,  or  the  practice  could  not  have  been 
changed. 

"  During  the  first  thirty  years  of  this  century,  the  great 
body  of  the  American  Lutheran  church  had,  therefore,  no 
human  creed  at  all  binding  upon  them,  though  they  always 
did  refer  (as  we  still  do,)  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  as  a 
substantial  expose  of  their  doctrines. 

As  freemen,  and  servants  only  of  Christ,  they  felt  that 
they  had  the  right,  and  rested  under  the  obligation  to  wor- 
ship God,  and  to  conduct  the  affairs  of  his  church  accord- 
ing to  the  dictates  of  their  own  conscience,  guided  by  the 
Scriptures ;  and  we  have  yet  to  see  any  evidence  that  they 
were  under  any  obligation  of  honor  or  honesty,  to  pursue 
a  different  course. 

Their  real  doctrinal  position,  at  the  formation  of  the  Gen- 
eral Synod,  was  that  of  fundamental  agreement  with  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  and  acknowledged  dissent  from  it  on 
some  minor  or  non-fundamental  points.  Thi.s  state  of  doc- 
trine alone  could  the  clause  of  the  General  Synod's  consti- 
tution be  designed  to  perpetuate,  which  denies  to  that  body 
"the  right  to  introduce  such  alterations  in  matters  apper- 
taining to  the  faith,  &c,  as  might,  in  any  way,  tend  to  bur- 
den the  consciences  of  the  breihren  in  Christ".  The  altera- 
tions prohibited,  must  have  been  alterations  from  the  state 
of  things  and  doctrines  actually  existing.  How  the  "con- 
sciences of  the  brethren  could  be  oppressed"  by  the  Gen- 
eral Synod's  altering  or  rejecting  any  doctrine  which  they 
did  not  believe,  we  cannot  divine ;  and  to  maintain  that  the 
14a 


\02       OUR    FATHERS    NOT   RIGID    SYMBOLISTS. 

framers  of  that  article  designed  by  it  to  perpetuate  or  shield 
from  alteration  any  doctrine  which  they  themselves  rejected, 
would  evrnce  more  zeal  than  sound  judgment. 

This  doctrinal  position  of  substantial  agreement  with  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  with  acknowledged  privilege  of  dif- 
ference on  non-fundamental  or  minor  points,  was  subse- 
quently made  symbolic  or  binding  by  the  General  Synod,  in 
her  Constitution  for  Synods,  and  this  is  the  official  creed  of 
the  General  Synod.  This  doctrinal  position  had  been  intro- 
duced in  the  same  way  and  with  exactly  equivalent  restric- 
tions, into  the  Constitution  of  the  Theological  Seminary  of 
the  General  Synod.  This  obligation,  written  by  ourselves, 
we  have  also  taken,  and  to  it  we  expect  to  adhere  so  long 
as  strength  is  granted  us  to  labor  in  the  vineyard  of  our 
blessed  Lord.  It  has  sometimes  been  said,  as  Lutherans 
we  ought  to  adhere  to  the  standards  of  the  Lutheran  church. 
This  is  perfectly  true  and  just,  if  the  standards  of  the  Lu- 
theran church  in  America  be  intended ;  for  these  are  none 
other  than  the  "Word  of  God  and  the  fundamentals  of  that 
Word  as  taught  substantially  in  the  Augsburg  Confession." 
But  as  to  the  former  symbolical  books  of  the  Lutheran 
church  in  Germany,  we  are  under  no  such  obligation.  Our 
churches,  for  near  a  century,  have  not  acknowledged  any 
one  of  them  except  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  for  ffty 
years  past  have  received  as  binding,  none  at  all,  until  the 
'General  Synod  formally  adopted  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
and  that  only  as  to  fundamentals  ;  and  probably  not  a  dozen 
of  all  our  American  ministers  have  ever  read  all  these  books. 
If  we  ask  the  question,  how  could  any  one  suppose  us  bound 
by  the  symbols  of  our  church  in  Germany?  we  can  per- 
ceive no  other  solution,  than  the  supposition  that  such  person 
has  adopted  some  phase  of  the  Unlutheran  and  unscriptural 
notion,  which  is  beginning  to  pervade  the  theology  of  some 
other  denominations,  and  regards  the  church  as  consisting  of 
an  ideal,  abstract  membership,  together  with  the  human  Con- 
stitution, Creeds,  Liturgies,  &c,  framed  and  professed  by 
"Christians  in  any  particular  age,  and  which  fictitiously  con- 
fers on  this  ideal  church  a  corporate  personality,  apart  from 
the  individual  members  who  compose  it.  In  this  unscriptural 
sense,  a  church,  that  is,  her  constitution,  creeds,  liturgy,  &c, 
may  be  orthodox,  and  her  actual  members  be  inlidel.  But,  we 
••ask,  will  these  creeds,  constitutions,  or  abstract  ideal  mem- 


THE    CHURCH   DEFINED.  163 

bership  appear  before  the  bar  of  God,  to  answer  for  the 
deeds  done  in  the  body;  or  the  professing  Christians  of 
every  age,  who  adopted  or  rejected  them?  When  the  apos- 
tle of  the  Gentiles  addressed  his  epistle  "to  the  church  at 
Corinth,"  did  he  mean  an  abstract  or  ideal  membership,  or 
the  creeds  or  regulations  of  the  Christians  in  that  place,  or 
the  houses  in  which  they  worshipped  ?  Let  his  own  words 
decide  the  point  for  us.  "Paul,  called  to  be  an  apostle  of 
Jesus  Christ,  &c,  unto  the  church  of  God  which  is  at  Co- 
rinth, to  them  that  are  sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus,  called  to  be 
saints,  and  to  all  that  in  every  place  call  upon  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord."  Here,  real  persons,  certainly,  and 
not  things,  are  regarded  as  the  church.  In  full  accordance 
with  this,  the  Augsburg  Confession  teaches,  That  the  Chris- 
tian  church  is  nothing  else  than  the  congregation  of  true  be- 
lievers. Art.  VIII.  Human  creeds  are  a  publication  of  the 
doctrinal  belief  only  of  those  who  framed  and  published 
them,  and  of  those  who  subsequently  avow  their  assent  to 
them,  either  in  whole  or  in  part ;  and  they  cannot,  possibly, 
be  binding  on  any  others,  who  have  not,  by  personal  avowal, 
adopted  them,  either  as  an  exponent  of  their  belief,  or  as  a 
rule  of  discipline.  This  view  of  the  subject  is  clearly  taught 
in  the  preface  to  the  Form  of  Concord,  where  we  are  told, 
"Symbols  cannot  possess  the  authority  of  a  judge  in  con- 
troversies, which  dignity  belongs  only  to  the  Scriptures, — 
but  they  show,  how,  at  particular  times,  the  scriptures  were 
understood  on  controverted  points  by  the  teachers  in  the 
church  of  God,  who  then  lived,  (quo  modo  singulis  lem- 
poribus  sacrae  literae  in  articulis  controversies  in  ecclesiae 
Dei  a  doctoribus  qui  turn  vixerunt,  intelectse  et  explicate  fu- 
erint.)  But,  as  this  subject  will  be  more  fully  considered 
hereafter,  we  here  pass  it  by,  and  devote  the  remnant  of 
this  chapter  to  the  inquiry  : 

How  much  agreement  with  Luther,  and. the  symbols  adopted 
at  different  times,  during  fialf  a  century  after  the  organization 
of  the  Lutheran  church,  is  requisite  in  order  honesily  to  retain 
the  name  of  Lutheran? 

In  the  judgment  of  some  it  is  necessary  to  believe  not 
only  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  Apology  to  it,  and  the 
Catechisms  and  Smalcald  Articles  of  Luther,  which  he  never 
designed  as  binding  symbols,  and  which  were  not  generally 
received  as  such  during  his  lifetime  ;  but  also  the  Form  of 


164       SOME  OF  THE  SYMBOLIC  BOOKS 

Concord,  which  was  not  in  existence  till  thirty-six  years 
after  his  death.  But  if  we  listen  to  the  judgment  of  every 
respectable  historian  of  the  last  three  centuries,  who  has 
treated  of  our  church,  and  of  the  millions  of  acknowledged 
Lutherans,  who  have  rejected  one  or  more  of  these  books  ; 
we  find  the  award  of  the  public  to  be  very  different. 

It  was  doubtless  unfortunate  and  Anti-protestant,  as  well 
as  contrary  to  Luther's  solemn  protest,  for  those  who  agreed 
with  him  in  sentiment,  to  adopt  the  nickname  given  them  by 
the  Papists,  and  to  call  the  church  of  the  son  of  God,  after 
any  mere  man.  If  an  inspired  apostle  would  not  suffer  the 
disciples  to  be  called  after  the  name  of  Paul,  or  Apollos,  or 
Peter,  much  less  should  the  name  of  any  uninspired  leader 
be  abused  to  this  purpose,  and  thus  practically,  though  un- 
consciously, be  thrust  in  between  the  believer  and  his  Lord. 
Yet,  as  this  has  been  done,  it  becomes  a  question,  whether 
those  who  find  the  church  of  their  choice  designated  by  this 
name,  and  who  prefer  that  church  on  the  whole,  to  all  oth- 
ers, shall  on  account  of  that  name,  (a  name  in  itself  dear  to 
their  hearts)  refuse  to  enter  that  church,  or  being  in  it,  shall 
renounce  their  private  judgment  in  studying  the  word  of 
God,  or  form  a  new  sect.  The  latter  part  of  this  alternative 
we  regard  as  not  only  utterly  unsustained  by  scripture,  and 
based  on  a  confused  and  pernicious  over-estimate  of  the 
framework  of  sectarianism  ;  but  also  radically  inconsistent 
with  the  scriptural  views  of  the  church  of  Christ.  All 
history  has  decided  against  it. 

I.  The  Form  of  Concord,  published  1580,  was  rejected 
by  the  following  Lutheran  nations,  principalities,  dukedoms, 
&c,  and  yet  no  one  ever  attempted  to  deny  their  right  to  the 
name  Lutheran. 

1.  The  kingdom  of  Denmark.  "  The  king,  though  invi- 
ted to  adopt  it,  refused  to  do  so,  by  advice  of  his  clergy, 
who  disapproved  of  it,  because  peace  and  unity  of  doctrine 
prevailed  in  his  dominions,  and  he  feared  its  introduction 
would  create  strife  and  divisions.  And  so  bitterly  was  he 
opposed  to  it  himself,  that  he  took  the  copy  (decorated  with  gold 
and  pearls)  sent  him  from  Germany,  cast  it  into  the  fire,  and 
made  it  a  capital  rffience  to  introduce  and  publish  it  in  the 
kingdom.  Kcellner's  Symbolik,  Vol.  I,  p.  575  576.  And 
though  at  a  subsequent  period  it  acquired  some  popularity, 
and  was  practically  used;  it  was  never  publicly  acknowl- 


ALWAYS    REJECTED    IN    EUROPE.  165 

edged  as  a  symbol.  See  Baumgarten's  Erlaeuterungen  zum 
Concordienbuch,  p.  184,  135.  Mosheim's  Eccles.  Hist., 
Vol.  III.  p.  155,  Murdock's  editicn. 

We  add  the  testimony  of  Shubert's  celebrated  work  on  the 
Ecclesiastical  and  Educational  Institutions  of  Sweden,  as 
summarily  given  by  Kcellner.  After  repeating  in  full  the 
oath  of  ordination,  which  mentions  in  addition  to  the  three 
ancient  creeds,  only  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  refers  to 
the  Liber  Concordiae  as  illustration  of  it,  Kollner  adds  this 
remark  :  "Upon  the  whole,  the  case  of  Sweden  is  like  that 
of  Denmark  and  of  Holstein.  It  was  from  the  beginning  cus- 
tomary to  bind  oneself  to  the  symbolical  books,  which  were 
not  adopted  until  after  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  only  in 
as  far  as  they  were  believed  to  agree  with  the  holy  Scriptures." 
In  later  times,  it  is  customary  in  public  documents,  instead 
of  the  phrase,  "the  Lutheran  doctrine,"  to  use  the  more 
appropriate  expression,  "the  pure  evangelical  doctrine" 
Kcellner's  Symbolik,  I.  p.  122. 

2.  The  kingdom  of  Sweden  did  not  receive  it  during  the 
first  thirteen  years  after  its  publication.  Hear  the  testimony 
of  that  ultra-Lutheran  historian  G-uericke,  (Symbolik,  2gL 
edition,  p.  112,  113.)  "And  if  Denmark  and  Sweden, 
stopping  at  a  still  more  youthful  age  in  regard  to  Confes- 
sions, did  not  concede  proper  symbolical  authority  to  the 
Apology  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  or  to  the  Smalcald 
Articles,  or  the  Larger  Catechism  of  Luther,  (and  in  Sweden 
not  even  the  Smaller  Catechism,)  they  would  naturally  be 
still  less  willing  formally  to  acknowledge  the  Form  of  Con- 
cord." Guericke,  Symb.,  p.  112,  113.  Still  at  a  later 
period,  in  1593,  the  Form  of  Concord  received  a  tolerably 
formal  acknowledgment,  (ziemlich  fomiliche  Anerkennung.) 

3.  ffessia  rejected  it. 

4.  Pomerania  rejected  it. 

5.  Holstein  rejected  it  for  more  than  half  a  century. 

6.  Anhalt;  and  the  cities  of  Strasburg,  Frankfort,  a.  M.y 
Speier,  Worms,  Xurenburg ,  Magdeburg,  Bremen,  Dantzic, 
&c,  &c.     Kcellner,  p.  577. 

II.  The  Smalcald  Articles,  published  in  1537,  were 
rejected  by  Sweden  and  Denmark.  In  Sweden,  the  ayin- 
bolic  books  generally  are  now  regarded  as  an  authorized 
explanation  of  the  Lutheran  faith;  yet  the  "Symbolical 
Books  of  the  Danish  church,  lately  published,  like  those  of 


166     SOME   SYMBOLIC   BOOKS    ALWAYS  KEJECTED. 

the  Swedish  church  in  1644,  (entitled  Confession  of  the 
Swedish  faith,  approved  by  the  council  at  Upsal  in  1593,) 
contains  only  the  three  ecumenical  confessions ;  namely,  the 
so-called  Apostles'  Creed,  the  Nicene  and  the  Athanasian 
Creeds,  and  the  Augsburg  Confession,  to  which  the  Danish 
collection  adds  the  Smaller  Catechism  of  Luther.  Both 
these  collections,  however,  exclude  the  Smalcald  Articles. 
Guericke's  Symb.  p.  67.  and  his  History,  p.  807,  1st  editon. 

III.  The  Apology  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  was 
denied  official  symbolic  authority  by  Sweden  and  Denmark. 
Guericke  sup.  cit. 

IV.  The  Larger  Catechism  of  Luther  was  denied  formal 
symbolic  authority  in  Sweden  and  Denmark.  Guericke, 
sup.  cit. 

V.  Even  the  Smaller  Catechism  of  Luther  was  not  re- 
ceived as  symbolic  in  Sweden ;  yet  in  both  these  kingdoms 
they  are  highly  respected,  and  the  Smaller  Catechism,  if  we 
mistake  not,  is  used  for  the  instruction  of  youth.  Guericke, 
p.  113. 

Here  then  we  have  the  historical  facts,  the  greater  part 
of  them  well  known  indeed  to  those  who  are  familiar  with 
the  history  of  our  church  in  Europe ;  but,  for  the  benefit  of 
others,  proved  by  the  authority  of  the  accurate  Kcellner, 
and  of  that  bigoted  Old-Lutheran,  Prof.  Guericke. 

What  now  appears  to  be  the  result  of  these  facts  ?  Did 
all  these  kingdoms  and  principalities,  which  are  known  in 
history  as  Lutheran,  and  to  whom  no  writer,  not  even 
Guericke,  denies  the  name  of  Lutheran,  receive  all  the  sym- 
bolical books  as  such  ?  Far,  very  far  from  it  ?  We  see, 
on  the  contrary,  that  whole  kingdoms,  especially  Sweden, 
which  has  sometimes  been  held  up  as  the  beau  idecd  of  Lu- 
theranism,  never  received  as  symbolical  one-half  of  them ; 
though  they  respected  and  used  them  as  theological  produc- 
tions ;  just  as  our  church  does  in  this  country.  In  short  we 
find,  that  the  declaration  of  Dr.  Hase,  is  literally  true,  when 
he  says  the  Augsburg  Confession  is  the  only  symbolic  book, 
which  has  been  acknowledged  by  the  ivhole  Lutheran  church. 
Hutterus  Redivivus,  p.  116,  §  50.  And  it  is  certain  that 
much  more  frequent  and  important  deviations  from  the 
Augsburg  Confession  would  have  been  avowed,  if  the  peace 
of  Augsburg,  in  1555,  had  not  guaranteed  toleration  to  th« 
Protestant  princes  only  so  long  as  they  and  their  theologians 


DIFFICULTIES    OF    MELAKCTHON,    ETC.        167 

adhered  to  the  Augsburg  Confession;  and  if  the  Papists  and 
especially  the  Jesuits  liad  not  watched  even  every  verbal  devi- 
ation, and  used  it  to  excite  the  Romish  Emperor  to  withdraw 
his  protection,  and  to  put  down  Protestantism  by  fire  and 
sword,  which  efforts  actually  eventuated  in  the  thirty  years' 
war.  It  is  well  known,  that  even  during  Luther's  lifetime, 
Melancthon,  Cruciger  and  others,  disapproved  of  a  part  of 
the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  yet  Luther  would  not  suffer 
them  to  leave  Wittenberg,  or  the  communion  of  the  Lutheran 
church,  when  they  on  one  occasion  expressed  a  willingness 
to  do  so,  if  they  could  .aot  deviate  from  Luther's  views  with- 
out denunciation  from  several  of  his  followers.  In  all  ages  of 
the  Lutheran  church,  there  have  been  among  her  ablest 
divines  some  who  dissented,  at  least  privately,  from  Luther's 
opinion,  that  the  real  or  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  pres- 
ent in  the  eucharist,  and  are  received  by  the  communicant,  as 
taught  in  the  Augsburg  Confession.  And  Guericke  himself 
admits,  what  is  indeed  matter  of  general  notoriety,  not  mere- 
ly that  the  neologians,  but  that  the  whole  Lutheran  church  in 
Germany  had  rejected  this  doctrine  before  1817,  when  the 
union  of  the  Lutheran  and  Reformed  churches  was  effected 
in  some  parts  of  that  country.  Even  to  this  day,  there  is  not 
a  single  Lutheran  kingdom  or  principality,  which  receives  any 
one  of  the  former  symbolical  boolcs  as  binding,  except  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  and  this,  as  we  were  informed  on  the  spot, 
only  as  to  its  substance.  Xow  if  all  the  world,  with  the 
exception  of  a  few  bigoted  ultra-Lutherans,  freely  concede  the 
name  Lutheran  to  th^se  millions  who  bear  it ;  it  is  rather 
too  late  in  the  day  for  a  few  individuals  in  this  country  to 
set  up  the  doctrine,  that  no  Lutheran  is  entitled  to  the  name, 
who  does  not  believe  and  profess  the  whole  catalogue  of  the 
former  symbolic  books,  or  at  least  so  receive  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  as  not  to  contradict  the  teachings  of  any  one  of 
the  other  books  !  Our  own  impression  of  the  equity  of  the 
case  is  this,  that  so  long  as  the  Lutheran  church,  in  this  or  any 
other  country,  adheres  to  the  fundamental  principle  of  Luther- 
anism,  that  the  Bible  is  the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and 
practice,  and  believes  the  great,  the  cardinal  doctrines  of  Lu- 
ther's system,  together  with  so  many  of  his  peculiarities,  as  to 
agree  more  fully  with  them  as  a  whole,  than  with  the  peculiari- 
ties of  any  other  denomination,  she  may  justly  retain  the 
Lutheran  name;  and  all  the  world,  a  few  ultraists  excepted. 


168  EARLY    ABANDONMENT    OF 

will  cordially  proclaim  the  equity  of  the  designation.  Thug 
also,  will  the  Protestant  churches  make  some  approximation 
to  the  precept  of  the  Saviour,  who  taught  us  :  one  only  is 
your  Master,  Christ,  and  ye  are  all  brethren. 


CHAPTER  II. 


Early  abandonment  of  the  strict,  symbolic  standpoint, 
by  the  founders  of  the  american  lutheran  cliurch. 

We  now  come  to  the  second  position  in  this  discussion. 
But  that  our  real  position  on  the  subject  in  general  may  not 
be  misapprehended,  it^seems  proper  to  premise  a  few  obser- 
vations. Let  it  not  be  supposed  that  we  are  hostile  to  creeds 
of  every  description.  It  is  indeed  true,  that  the  Word  of 
God  neither  enjoins,  nor  expressly  sanctions  any  human 
creeds.  It  is  itself,  professedly,  a  creed,  and  an  inspired 
one.  In  it  God  himself  has  taught  us  what  we  are  to  be- 
lieve, and  what  we  are  to  do,  that  is,  has  given  us  a  rule 
of  faith  and  practice.  It  is  reasonable  to  suppose,  that  such 
a  divine  rule  would  be  sufficient  for  all  purposes,  and  that 
rule  itself  professes  to  be  a  sufficient  one,  "  able  to  make  us 
wr>e  unto  salvation,  through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus." 
This  is  represented  as  the  test  by  which  the  opinions  of  men 
are  to  be  tried.  "To  the  law  and  the  testimony;  if  they 
speak  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because  there  is  no 
light  in  them."  And  Paul  declares  that,  if  an  angel  from 
heaven  should  preach  "any  other  doctrine  than  that  which 
he  taught,"  and  which  is  recorded  in  his  epistle,  "let  him 
be  accursed."  These  facts  should  make  us  reflect  care- 
fully, before  we  erect  any  other  standard  of  doctrine,  in  a 
manner,  which,  even  indirectly,  or  by  human  infirmity, 
might,  in  any  degree,  take  the  place  of  this  inspired  rule. 
Still,  the  Saviour  and  his  apostles  have  prescribed  certain 
requisitions  to  be  demanded  by  those  whom  they  received 
into  the  church,  of  all  others  who  might  subsequently  ap- 
ply for  admission.     For  example,  applicants  had  to  express 


SYMBOLICAL    REQUISITIONS.  169 

their  belief,  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ,  that  is.  the  Messiah, 
&c.  This  brief  acknowledgment,  by  frequent  repetition, 
acquired  a  settled  form,  which,  when  it  first  meets  us  in  the 
literature  of  the  church,  had  grown  into  what  was  called 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  constituting  less  than  a  duodecimo 
page ;  and  this  is  all  the  creed  used  in  the  Christian  church 
in  the  whole  world,  so  far  as  is  known,  for  several  hundred 
years,  during  the  golden  age  of  Christianity.  We  fully 
coincide  with  the  judgment  of  the  early  church,  thus  ex- 
pressed, that  for  the  purity  of  the  church,  and  harmony  of 
its  operations,  a  creed  of  fundamentals  is  necessary,  or  at 
least  useful,  if  properly  employed.  Yet  it  is  evident,  from 
many  considerations,  that  it  should  include  only  fundamen- 
tals, only  such  doctrines  as  we  believe  necessary  to  the 
Christian  character,  together  with  as  many  points  of  gov- 
ernment and  discipline,  as  are  requisite  for  harmony  in  ac- 
tion. Otherwise,  we  destroy  the  unity  of  Christ's  body,, 
we  violate  the  charity  inculcated  in  the  gospel,  and  wage  a. 
war  of  "doubtful  disputations"  with  the  brother,  whom  we: 
consider  "weak  in  the  faith."  We,  therefore,  after  much., 
and  prayerful  study  of  this  subject,  in  the  light  of,  scripture 
and  history,  approve  of  the  use  of  the  so  called  Apostles*" 
Creed,  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  the  fundamentals  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  as  an  expression  of  the  prominent 
truths  we  believe  the  bible  to  teach,  and  as  tests  of  admis- 
sion and  discipline  in  the  church.  This  is  the  ground  which, 
our  fathers  in  this  country  practically  adopted,  half  a  cen- 
tury ago ;  this  is  the  ground  which  our  General  Synod  has. 
formally  adopted,  and  the  ground  on  which  we  stand. 
These  several  positions  might  be  established  by  numerous, 
irrefragable  arguments,  but  the  present  discussion  does  not 
properly  cover  this  ground. 

We  return,  then,  to  our  next  position,  that  the  fathers  of 
our  American  church  soon  relaxed  from  their  rigid  views  of 
obligation  to  the  symbolical  books. 

There  are  numerous  reasons  to  authorize  the  belief,  that 
Dr.  Muhlenberg  himself,  the  principal  founder  of  our  Amer- 
ican church,  was  a  man  of  much  more  liberality  and  en- 
larged views  of  Christian  apostolic  liberty,  than  he  has- 
sometimes  received  credit  for.  As  evidence  of  this  fact, 
we  will  cite  his  liberality  towards  some  "Separatists,"  as 
they  are  styled  in  Germany,  before  he  came  to  America ;- 
15 


170  EARLY    ABANDONMENT    OF 

for  which  he  is  censured  by  the  historian  Heinsiiis,  who 
was  a  churchman  of  the  strictest  class.  Speaking  of  our 
church  in  Philadelphia,  he  says:1  "The  Ev.  Lutheran  con- 
gregation in  that  place,  has  recently  obtained  a  preacher, 
concerning  whom  we  rather  wish  than  can  confidently  ex- 
pect, that  he  will  preserve  those  churches  in  order  and  in 
purity  of  doctrine,  without  divisions.  This  minister  is  Mr. 
Muhlenberg,  who  some  time  since  studied  at  Goettingen, 
afterwards  officiated  as  deacon  inspector  in  the  baronial 
Gersdorf-Orphanhouse  at  Grooshennersdorf,  in  Lusatia, 
and  who  secretly  advocated  the  course  of  the  Separatists  in  « 
publication  against  Dr.  Mentz&r."  We  do  not  know  what 
points  Dr.  Muhlenberg  vindicated  in  this  work,  but  it  is 
well  known  that  those  Separatists  were  generally  pious  per- 
sons, who  saw,  or  thought  they  saw,  defects  in  the  estab- 
lished (Lutheran)  church,  and  wished  to  worship  God  in 
what  they  considered  a  purer  and  a  more  scriptural  man- 
ner. This  fact,  however,  proves  that  Dr.  M.  was  a  man 
who  thought  for  himself,  and  disapproved  of  some  things 
in  the  Lutheran  church  in  Germany,  which  were  approved 
by  Heinsiiis  himself,  a  rigid  Lutheran  and  a  pious  man. 
That  Dr.  M.  did  not  regard  liturgies  as  very  important,  is 
evident  from  the  fact,  that  twelve  years  after  he  had  been 
laboring  in  organizing  and  building  up  churches  in  this 
country,  where  he  thought  it  desirable  for  the  sake  of  the 
in  public  worship  to  compose  a  liturgy,  he  had  not  a 
copy  of  a  liturgy  used  in  Germany,  nor  could  one  be  found ; 
so  that  when  he  and  his  fellow  laborers,  Brunnholtz  and 
Handschuh,  undertook  to  form  one,  they  had  to  take  as  its 
basis,  the  liturgy  of  the  Savoy  Lutheran  church  in  London ; 
for,  says  he,  "we  had  no  other  one  at  hand."2  "That 
he  did  not  like  a  long  liturgy,  is  evident,  because  they  pre- 
pared a  short  one,"  even  shorter  than  "the  enlarged'''  re- 
print of  it  in  1786,  which  is  not  more  than  half  as  large  as 
that  now  in  use.  Nor  was  he  a  stickler  for  the  peculiarities 
of  any  part  of  Germany,  for  he  says;  "we  adapted  it  to 
the  circumstances  of  our  congregations,  which  had  come 
from  different  parts  of  Germany. 

(1)  Vol.  iii.  page  3S9,  of  his  "Unpartheiiscke  Kirclien  Historic     Jena, 
1754. 

(£)  Hall.  Nachrichten,  p.  676. 


SYMBOLICAL    REQUISITIONS.  171 

That  lie  and  his  associates  were  not  ardently  devoted  to 
the  whole  mass  of  symbolical  books,  is  probable,  as  they 
are  not  named  in  their  Synodical  constitution  (ministerial 
ordnung, )  so  far  as  appears  from  our  oldest  cop}*,  nor  in  their 
liturgy,  except  the  catechism,  for  the  instruction  of  youth. 
It  is  worthy  of  note,  also,  that  the  charter  for  the  "congre- 
gations in  and  near  Philadelphia,"  which  was  probably  as 
usual  in  the  case  of  such  documents,  written  by  some  law- 
yer, under  the  direction  of  Muhlenberg  and  his  associates, 
mentions  not  one  of  the  symbolical  books,  though  dated  as 
early  as  1765,  and  very  extended  and  minute  in  its  specifi- 
cations, covering  four  and  a  half  quarto  pages.  That  they 
were  unwilling  to  receive  as  binding  any  of  the  symbolical 
books  except  the  Augsburg  Confession,  is  evident,  because 
in  the  prominent  documents  in  which  they  mention  that  sym- 
bol, they  say  nothing  about  the  others.  Thus,  in  the 
(lurchowrdnung)  discipline  of  the  church  at  Philadelphia, 
written  by  Muhlenberg  himself,  in  1762,  the  ministers  are 
bound  in  the  very  first  clause  to  teach  according  to  the  un- 
altered Augsburg  Confession,  but  noticing  is  said  about  the 
other  symbolical  books.  The  catechism  is  subsequently  pre- 
scribed for  the  instruction  of  the  young.  The  same  disci- 
pline was  introduced  into  the  church  at  Lancaster,  unaltered. 
The  same  is  the  case  in  the  inscription  on  Muhlenberg's 
church  at  the  Trappe,  dated  1743,  the  very  next  year  after 
his  arrival  in  this  country,  "this  church  sacred  to  the  soci- 
ety devoted  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,"  and  nothing  more. 
Twenty  years  afterwards,  he  remained  firm  in  this  distinc- 
tion, and  generally  the  other  symbolical  books ;  for  in  his 
address  to  his  congregation,  he  again  speaks  of  that  church 
as  being  founded  "on  the  apostles  and  prophets  and  the 
unaltered  Augsburg  Confession,"  without  even  a  reference 
to  the  other  symbols.  Can  any  impartial  mind  fail  to  per- 
ceive that  Muhlenberg  desired  no  other  book  to  be  regarded 
as  symbolical,  except  the  Augsburg  Confession,  when  he  de- 
signedly omits  them  on  these  solemn,  official  occasions? 
Again,  we  find  another  proof  in  an  interesting  diary  of  a 
voyage  made  by  father  Muhlenberg  near  the  close  of  his 
life,  to  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  found  in  the  Ev.  Review, 
In  a  letter  which  Dr.  Muhlenberg  addressed  to  Europe,  re- 
questing the  mission  of  a  minister  to  supply  the  church  in 
that  city,  he  solicits  one  "who  is  able  and  willing  to  propa- 


172  EARLY    ABANDONMENT    OF 

gate  the  gospel  according  to  the  foundation  of  the  holy 
apostles  and  prophets,  whereof  Jesus  Christ  is  the  corner 
stone,  and  to  administer  the  holy  sacraments  agreeably  to 
the  articles  of  our  unaltered  Augsburg  Confessio7l.,'  Here, 
too,  it  cannot  fail  to  be  seen,  that  this  indefatigable  servant 
of  Christ,  again  says  not  a  word  of  the  other  symbolic  books, 
and  certainly  if  he  wished  or  expected,  that  the  minister  who 
might  be  sent  over,  would  here  be  required  to  bind  himself 
to  the  other  symbolical  books  also,  he  must  necessarily  have 
mentioned  them,  as  he  so  distinctly  specifies  one  of  them, 
the  Augsburg  Confession.  But  it  is  evident,  that  if  the  ex- 
pccted  minister  differed  from  the  specifications  of  all  the 
other  symbolical  books  on  all  the  various  points  not  deter- 
mined in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  he  would  still  be  such  a 
minister  as  Dr.  M.  requested,  and  as  he  would  not  hesitate 
to  ordain.  Nay,  further,  although  Ave  do  not  know  this  to 
have  been  the  design  of  Dr.  M.,  and  therefore  do  not  assert 
it,  for  our  cause  needs  no  doubtful  interpretations ;  yet,  he 
says  the  gospel  is  to  be  preached  according  to  the  founda- 
tion of  the  holy  apostles  and  prophets,  and  only  of  the  sacra- 
ments does  he  say  they  shall  be  administered  according  to 
the  Au^sburo-  Confession. 

Now,  when  we  recollect  he  did  not  feel  bound  to  believe 
all  the  minor  points  even  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  that  he 
rejected  Auricular  Confession,  and  in  all  probability,  as  far 
as  we  can  judge  from  his  writings,  also  the  imputation  of 
Adam's  sin  to  his  posterity  ;  that  he  did  not  use  the  liturgy 
of  Germany,  but  for  twelve  years,  as  it  would  seem,  none 
at  all,  and  then  made  a  very  "short"  one;  we  may  justly 
claim  him  as  in  principle,  the  father  of  American  Lutheran- 
ism  "so  called."  For  American  Lutheranism,  as  repre- 
sented in  the  General  Synod,  cannot  with  truth  be  repre- 
sented as  a  creedless  system ;  on  the  contrary,  it  adheres  to 
the  fundamentals  of  the  gospel  as  taught  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  whilst  it  refuses  to  acknowledge  as  binding,  the 
other  books,  however  much  they  may  be  valued  by  many 
amongst  us,  as  theological  productions. 

This  is,  in  fact,  also  the  doctrinal  standpoint  of  the  greater 
part  of  Evangelical  Lutherans  in  Germany  at  the  present 
time.  With  the  exception  of  about  one  hundred  ministers, 
(the  so  called  Old  Lutherans,)  out  of  seven  thousand  in 
Germany,  none  are  bound  to  any  thing  more  than  the  Augs- 


*. 


SYMBOLICAL    REQUISITIONS.  173 

burg  Confession,  and  that  not  to  every  minor  doctrine  in  it. 
In  traveling-  through  Wurtemberg,  we  made  particular  in- 
quiry of  Dr.  Schmidt,  the  principal  professor  in  the  Theo- 
logical Seminary  in  Tuebingen,  himself  an  orthodox  man, 
and  were  informed  that  the  clergy  of  Wurtemberg  are  obliged 
only  to  teach  "  according  to  the  principles  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession,"  (nach  den  Principien  der  Aug.  Conf.)  or  as 
another  eminent  minister  informed  us,  (nach  dem  Geist  mid 
Sinn,)  according  to  the  spirit  and  import  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession.  These  are  the  exact  words  as  recorded  in  our 
diary  at  the  time. 

The  views  of  Dr.  Muhlenberg  as  above  given,  are  in  per- 
fect consonance  with  the  statements  made  to  us  a  few  days 
since,  by  one  of  the  most  aged  ministers  of  our  church,  our 
venerable  father,  who  was  admitted  into  that  Synod  in  1792, 
and  has  successively  held  the  highest  offices  of  that  body. 
He  asserts,  that  at  the  time  of  his  admission,  the  propriety 
of  requiring  a  pledge  was  a  matter  of  doubt  and  debate  ; 
that  in  some  instances  it  was  exacted  and  in  others  no  :  but 
some  years  later  it  was  wholly  omitted  ;  and  that  Dr.  Hel- 
muth,  confessedly,  one  of  the  most  pious  members  of  that 
body,  who  was  any  thing  else  than  a  rationalist,  and  com- 
menced his  labors  in  our  church  as  early  as  1769,  was  prom- 
inent in  opposing  the  requisition  of  any  other  creed  than  the 
Bible.  Muhlenberg  himself  had  already  been  translated  to 
a  better  world.  Another  highly  respectable  and  learned 
minister  of  our  church,  who  also  entered  the  ministry  about 
the  close  of  the  last  century,  or  beginning  of  this,  in  a  letter 
now  before  me,  says:  "That  the  exaction  of  a  promise  to 
conform  to  the  s}-mbolic  books  ivas  ever  habitual"  with  the 
Synod  of  Pennsylvania  "  I  do  not  believe."  It  is,  mor 
certain  that  the  Synod  of  New  York,  one  of  the  olde  I  in 
our  church,  when  framing  her  constitution,  introduced  a  i 
forbidding  the  use  of  any  other  doctrinal  test  than  the  Bible. 
If  then,  our  fathers,  who  in  Europe  were  pledged  to  the 
whole  mass  of  the  symbolic  books,  (namely,  to  the  three 
ancient  creeds,  the  Apostles',  the  Nicene  and  the  Athanasian, 
the  Augsburg  Confession,  the  Apology  to  the  Confession, 
the  Smalkalcl  Articles,  the  smaller  and  larger  Catechisms  of 
Luther,  and  the  Form  of  Concord,)  did  on  their  arrival  in 
this  country,  or  soon  after,  make  a  distinction  between  them, 
and  in  their  Liturgies,  church  disciplines,  and  other  \m\  or- 
16a 


174  EARLY    ABANDONMENT    OF 

tant  official  documents,  if  they  refer  to  any  of  the  symbolic 
books,  mention  only  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  omit  the 
other  confessions  altogether;  if  they,  as  early  as  1792,  were 
divided  on  the  propriety  of  exacting  any  other  test  than  the 
Bible  and  some  years  later  entirely  omitted  the  requisition  of  a 
pledge  to  any  of  the  symbolical  books  ;  if  all  these  things 
are  true,  as  is  certain,  then  it  must  be  admitted,  that  our 
fathers,  even  the  oldest  of  them,  soon  relaxed  from  their 
rigid  views  of  obligation  to  the  symbolical  books,  which  at 
that  time  prevailed  in  Germany,  and  with  which  they  prob- 
ably came  to  this  country. 

It  has  already  been  stated,  that  the  founders  of  our  Amer- 
ican church  rejected  several  of  the  doctrines  of  the  symbolic 
books,  such  as  auricular  confession,  exorcism,  the  imputa- 
tion of  Adam's  sin  (or  rather  of  the  depraved  nature  inher- 
ited from  him,)  to  his  posterity  as  personal  guilt,  and  we 
may  add,  at  least  in  regard  to  some  of  them,  the  lax  notions 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  on  the  Christian  Sabbath.  It 
may  not  be  amiss  to  show  these  deviations  more  fully,  and 
also  in  later  days  to  exhibit  somewhat  more  in  detail  the  ac- 
tual, prevailing  state  of  doctrine,  at  the  time  of  the  organi- 
zation of  the  'General  Synod. 

Dr.  Kunze,  propably  the  most  learned  of  our  older  min- 
isters, and  no  less  distinguished  for  his  piety,1  than  learning, 
in  his  history  of  the  Christian  Religion,  thus  expresses  his 
views  on  the  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  :  "  To  derive  original 
sin  from  the  first  man's  being  the  federal  head  or  represen- 
tative of  the  human  race,  seems  not  -satisfactory  to  a  mind 
inclined  to  derive  or  expect  only  good  and  perfect  things 
from  the  good  and  perfect  Creator.  By  one  man's  disobe- 
dience, it  is  true,  many  were  made  sinners,  but  not  on  ac- 
count of  an  imputation  of  this  man's  sin,  but  -because  by 
Tlim,  sin  entered  the  world."2  And  on  the  subject  of  the 
Christian  JSabbath  the  Doctor  took  such  high  and  decided 
grounds  as  to  excite  hostility  and  even  persecution  from 
some  of  his  hearers. 

Dr.  Lochman  himself,  speaking  of  the  Article  in  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  on  Natural  depravity,  uses  this  language : 


(1)  See  lils  work,  "Eiu  "Wortfuer  den  Yerstand  und  das  Herz  passim/ 
and  especially  p.  208-211. 

(2)  Locliman's  Lutlier/p.  88. 


SYMBOLICAL    KE  QU  IS  I  T  I  0  N  S  .  175 

The  last  clause  in  the  above  article,  namely,  the  clause  "con- 
demneth  all  who  are  not  born  again  of  water  and  of  the 
spirit,"  is  thus  explained  by  some:  "If  we  suffer  our  de- 
praved nature  to  have  the  rule  over  us,  it  will  certainly  lead 
us  to  ruin  and  condemnation."1  This  we  know,  from  personal 
interviews  with  him,  to  have  been  -the  Doctor's  own  opinion. 

The  Rev.  Schober,  of  North  Carolina,  though  a  warm 
friend  of  piety  and  active  advocate  of  fundamental  orthodoxy, 
did  not  receive  the  Augsburg  Confession  implicitly  himself; 
and  though  he  desired  to  introduce  an  acknowledgment  of 
it  into  the  constitution  of  the  General  Synod,  did  not  design, 
had  his  efforts  been  successful,  to  require  the  belief  of  all 
its  minor  doctrines  as  a  term  of  admission.  Had  such  been 
his  purpose,  he  would  have  excluded  himself.  In  the  edi- 
tion of  the  Augsburg  Confession  published  by  himself,  he 
appended  notes  to  several  articles,  indicating  his  dissent  from 
them.  Hear  his  own  language  on  the  subject  of  Confession 
and  Absolution,  (Art.  xi.  of  Conf.) 

'  •  This  article  was  inserted  at  the  time  of  the  delivery  of 
this  Confession,  chiefly  to  show  a  conciliatory  spirit  to  the 
other  party;  but  the  practice  of  private  confession  and  ab- 
solution is  entirely  discontinued  in  our  Lutheran  churches," 
p.  107.  And  of  course  the  doctrine  on  which  it  is  based,  is 
also  rejected. 

On  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  he  follows  the  Latin 
copy  of  Art.  x.  of  the  Confession,  which  omits  the  word 
true  from  before  "body,"  in  the  German,  adds  the  word 
"  extei'nal"  to  emblems,  which  is  not  found  in  the  Latin  or 
German  copy,  and  in  addition  to  all  appends  the  following 
note :  "  As  Christ  has  promised  unto  his  disciples  and  true 
followers,  that  he  will  be  with  them  to  the  end  of  the  world, 
and  as  he  has  been  pleased  to  give  us  the  gracious  assurance, 
to  be  present  with  us  whenever  we  assemble  in  his  name  ; 
how  firmly  may  we  not  rely  on  his  promises,  especially  when 
we  celebrate  the  Lord's  Supper  according  to  his  holy  insti- 
tution, in  solemn  commemoration  of  his  sufferings  and  death, 
and  appropriate  his  merits  to  our  own  hearts."  But  he  says 
nothing  about  receiving  the  body  and  blood. of  Christ  in  the 
ordinance. 

But  to  place  this  matter  beyond  all  doubt,  boih  in  regard 


(1)  p.  86—88  articles. 


176  EARLY    ABANDONMENT    OF 

to  Rev.  Schober,  and  the  ministers  of  the  North  Carolina 
Synod,  generally,  even  as  early  as  the  year  1 820,  we  add  a 
document,  adopted  by  that  Synod  at  the  very  meeting  at 
which  delegates  were  elected,  to  attend  the  Convention  at 
Hagerstown,  in  October  of  the  same  year,  for  the  purpose 
of  forming  a  Constitution  for  the  General  Synod.  At  that 
meeting  a  letter  was  addressed  to  the  North  Carolina  Synod 
by  a  minister  of  a  sister  church,  to  which  the  following  an- 
swer, prepared  by  a  committee  of  Synod,  was  adopted  ;  and 
the  Rev.  Schober  requested  to  forward  it  to  the  memorialists, 
accompanied  by  " a  polite  and  brotherly  address"  in  the 
name  of  the  Synod  : 

"To  the  Rev.  James  Hill: 

Rev.  and  Dear  Sir, — In  answer  to  your  question,  whether 
water  baptism  effects  regeneration?  we  say  we  do  not  fully 
know  what  you  mean  by  the  word  "effects,"  as  it  may  have 
many  definitions.  But  we  say,  that  baptism  is  beneficial, 
and  ought  to  be  attended  to  as  a  command  of  God ;  but  we 
do  not  believe  that  all  who  are  baptized  with  water,  are  regen- 
erated and  born  again  unto  God,  so  as  to  be  saved  without 
the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  or,  in  other  words,  with- 
out faith  in  Christ.  And  as  to  the  second  question,  we  do 
not  believe  nor  teach,  that  the  body  and  blood  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Chr'td,  are  corporeally  received  along  with  the  bread  and 
wine  in  the  Lord's  Supper;  but  that  the  true  believer 
does  spiritucdlg  receive  and  partake  of  the  same,  through 
fedth  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  all  the  saving  benefits  of  his  death 
and  passion."1 

Here,  then,  we  cannot  fail  to  see,  that  this  whole  Synod, 
(for  they  seem  all  to  have  been  of  one  mind,)  had  aban- 
doned the  ground  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  believed 
only  a  spiritual  presence  and  perception  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  by  faith  in  the  eucharist,  and  this  limited, 
of  course,  to  the  believer;  and  especially  was  this  the  doc- 
trinal position  of  Mr.  Schober,  who  was  the  leading  and 
most  active  spirit  in  that  body,  and  personally  carried  on  a 
controversy  with  David  Ilenkel,  partly  on  this  very  doctrine. 

But  still  farther,  to  show  the  real  doctrinal  position  of  Mr. 

(1)  See  Transactions  of  the  Lutheran  Synod  of  North  Carolina  and  ad' 
jacent  States  lor  1820,  printed  at  Raleigh*  p.  18. 


SYMBOLICAL    REQUISITIONS.  177 

Schober  and  his  Synod,  at  the  organization  of  the  General 
Synod,  we  add  another  extract  from  the  same  minutes,  (p.  6, ) 
in  which  Mr.  Schober,  as  Secretary,  gives  a  statement  of  a 
discussion  which  occurred  at  that  meeting,  between  several, 
Messrs.  Henkels,  and  the  Synod.  Mr.  Schober  says  :  "They 
accused  us  of  not  teaching  water  baptism  to  be  regenera- 
tion, and  that  we  did  not  accept  the  elements  in  the  eucharisi 
as  the  true  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  corporeally,  and 
therefore,  and  because  the  plan  for  a  general  union  of  oui 
church,  (that is,  the  General  Synod,)  which  they  feared  we 
would  adopt,  was  against  the  Augsburg  Confession;  they 
could  not  unite  with  us."  These  Messrs.  Henkels,  who 
had  for  years  been  associated  with  Mr.  Schober  in  the  same 
Synod,  and  well  knew  his  views,  seem  to  have  had  little  ex- 
pectation, that  the  General  Synod,  which  Mr.  Schober  was 
so  anxious  to  establish,  would  have  the  least  desire  strictly 
to  enforce  the  Augsburg  Confession ;  on  the  contrary,  their 
standing  charge  against  him  and  his  associates  was,  that 
they  did  not  hold  the  doctrines  of  that  Confession. 

It  has  indeed  been  supposed  that  a  pledge  to  the  unal- 
tered Augsburg  Confession  bound  its  subjects  to  the  whole 
system,  taught  also  in  all  the  other  symbols  ! !  This  opin- 
ion is  utterly  unfounded.  Nor  can  any  authority  be  ad- 
duced for  it.  No  historian  has  ever  asserted,  that  an 
understanding  existed  in  Europe,  that  whoever  signed  the 
unaltered  Augsburg  Confession,  thereby  bound  himself  to 
adhere  to  the  entire  system  taught  in  all  the  other  books. 
If  such  an  understanding  had  existed,  how  absurd,  then, 
was  the  custom  of  binding  ministers  explicitly  to  the  other 
books  also,  which  prevailed  for  seven  hundred  years,  until 
the  beginning  of  this  century  ?  If  the  matter  was  so  un- 
derstood, why  did  Sweden,  and  Denmark,  and  Prussia,  and 
a  number  of  other  portions  of  the  Lutheran  church  refuse 
to  receive  the  Apology  to  the  Confession?  And  why  did 
the  more  rigid  Lutherans  complain  of  those  countries,  which 
received  the  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession,  but  rejected 
one  or  more  of  the  other  books,  if  the  reception  of  that  one 
bound  them  to  all  ?  Why  does  even  Guericke  complain  that 
they  did  not  attain  symbolic  manhood  ?  In  short,  we  can- 
not make  the  supposition  tally  with  history  at  all,  and  there- 
fore, are  compelled  to  regard  it,  in  fact,  as  unreasonable 
and  unfounded,  as  it,  at  first  view,  appears  to  be.     Guericke 


178  AUGSBURG     CONFESSION     DOES     NOT 

does  indeed  attempt  to  show,  if  we  recollect  rightly,  that 
those  who  received  the  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession  were 
under  a  logical  obligation  to  adhere  to  the  others,  which  we 
shall  prove  unfounded  ;  but  the  question  before  us  is  en- 
tirely different,  namely,  whether  our  fathers  did  not  relin- 
quish the  practice  of  requiring  a  pledge  to  the  other  sym- 
bolical books,  and  confine  themselves  to  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  which  is  a  fact  to  be  established  by  historical 
evidence. 

But  may  it  not  also  be  maintained,  that  the  other  sym- 
bolical books,  the  Catechisms  of  Luther  excepted,  were 
written  to  explain  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  do  not 
teach  any  different  doctrines,  but  only  define  the  position  of 
the  church  towards  the  Calvinists,  &c,  and  therefore,  all 
who  receive  the  latter  should  receive  the  former  also.  To 
this  we  reply,  if  the  other  books  did  not  touch  on  any  ad- 
ditional doctrine,  (which  is,  however,  not  the  case,)  but 
only  dilated  on  those  more  generically  stated  in  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  they  would  be  objectionable  as  binding 
creeds  ;  because,  whilst  men  might  agree  on  the  few  general 
specifications  of  doctrine,  delineated  in  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, they  might,  and  would  differ  on  many  of  the  ex- 
planations, ramifications  and  amplifications  of  them,  con- 
tained in  the  other  books.  As  well  might  we  affirm,  that 
all  who  can  agree  to  pledge  themselves  to  the  few  generic 
specifications  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  could  just  as 
well  adopt,  as  their  confession  of  faith,  that  excellent  and 
volumnious  work,  "  ReinbecFs  (Betrachtungen)  Reflections 
on  the  Augsbury  Confession"  in  nine  ponderous  quarto  vols.; 
for  they  are  all  written  professedly  and  actually  in  explana- 
tion of  that  symbol.  Or,  to  illustrate  the  point  still  more 
clearly,  as  well  might  we  assert,  that  all  who  adopt  the 
American  Constitution,  as  all  our  citizens  do,  can  just  as 
well  also  adopt  the  many  volumes  containing  explanations 
of  the  provisions  of  that  constitution,  written  by  authors  of 
our  several  political  parties.  The  thing  is  impossible.  Who 
does  not  know  that  these  different  authors,  like  the  several 
parties  to  which  they  belong,  deduce  very  different,  yea, 
directly  contradictory  views  from  that  same  instrument, 
and  that  they  could  not  possibly  agree  ?  And  is  it  not 
equally  notorious  matter  of  history,  that  different  writers, 
who  have  all  agreed  in  assenting  to  the  generic  statements 


INVOLVE    THE     OTHER    SYMBOLS.  179 

of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  have  entertained  a  multitude 
of  different  opinions  in  regard  to  the  minor  specifications, 
the  explanations,  the  circumstances  and  relations  of  those 
doctrines. 

The  proten  pseudos,  the  radical  error,  of  the  ultra-Luther- 
ans on  this  point,  is  this,  that  they  lose  sight  of  the  difference 
between  generic  and  specific  truths.  Religious,  as  well  as 
other  truths,  are  encircled  by  a  vast  multitude  of  relations 
and  circumstances.  Now  these  truths  may  be  stated  more 
or  less  generically,  that  is,  in  stating  them,  we  may  intro- 
duce more  or  fewer  of  those  minor  relations  and  circum- 
stances. And  such  is  the  constitution  of  mind  conferred  on 
us  by  the  Creator,  that  whilst  the  great  mass  of  men  agree 
in  a  generic  statement  of  truths,  in  political  or  religious 
science,  even  of  truths  derived  from  the  Bible  ;  the  more 
you  enter  into  an  enumeration  of  specific  details,  or  sup- 
posed relations,  the  smaller  the  number  of  those,  who  can 
agree  in  them  all.  Thus,  all  denominations  of  Christians, 
agree  to  the  few  generic  truths  stated  in  the  so-called  Apos- 
tles' Creed,  the  only  one  used  by  Christians  during  the  first 
three  centuries.  Yet,  when  we  take  up  a  creed  of  ten  or 
twenty  times  its  length,  such  as  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
the  39  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  or  the  Heidel- 
berg Catechism,  Ave  find  these  same  Christians  differing 
concerning  the  detailed  statements  of  these  several  symbols 
on  the  subject  of  the  very  doctrines  generically  stated  in  tbe 
Apostles'  Creed.  And  just  in  proportion  as  we  extend  the 
creed  by  adding  more  specifications  and  relations,  do  we  also 
increase  the  difficulty  of  its  reception  by  others.  The  grand 
reason  of  this  fact  is,  that  these  minor  circumstances  and 
relations  are  less  clearly  revealed  in  scripture,  and  in  stone 
instances,  are  mere  human  inferences  from  what  is  revealed, 
and  also,  because  the  human  mind  can  apprehend  sonu  of 
these  minor  relations  less  clearly  than  it  does  the  cardinal 
facts  and  doctrines  of  the  gospel.  From  these  considera- 
tions, we  trust  our  readers  will  easily  perceive  the  fallacy 
of  the  supposition,  that  whoever  can  assent  to  the  more 
generic  statement  of  doctrine  in  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
a  pamphlet  of  something  like  the  size  of  Matthew's  gospel, 
can  also  necessarily  adopt  all  the  minor  specifications  of  re- 
lations and  circumstances,  which  are  contained  in  the  whole 


180      AUGSBURG  CONFESSION  DOES  NOT 

mass  of  the  former  symbolic  books,  amounting  to  twice  the 
size  of  the  whole  New  Testament ! 

But  in  order,  if  possible,  to  illustrate  this  point  still  more 
clearly,  we  will  select  an  example  taken  from  the  symbol- 
ical books  themselves.  Thus,  the  Augsburg  Confession,  in 
its  third  article,  consisting  of  about  twenty  lines,  contains  a 
historical  and  generic  statement  concerning  the  Person  of  the 
Saviour,  affirming  his  divinity,  his  incarnation  or  birth  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  the  union  of  his  divine  and  human  nature 
into  one  person,  who  is  true  God  and  man,  his  sufferings, 
crucifixion  and  death  as  a  propitiatory  sacrifice,  not  only 
for  hereditary  depravity,  but  also  for  all  actual  transgres- 
sions ;  his  descent  into  hell,  resurrection,  ascension  to  heav- 
en, his  session  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  his  everlasting  do- 
minion over  all  creatures,  his  sanctification  of  believers 
through  the  Spirit,  and  protection  of  them  against  sin  and 
satan,  as  also  his  final  appearance  to  judge  the  quick  and 
the  dead.  Now,  to  all  these  statements,  given  in  very  few 
more  words  than  we  have  here  employed,  all  evangelical 
Christians  can  cordially  assent,  except  the  descent  into  hell, 
(which  was  not  in  the  earliest  form  of  the  creed,)  and  that 
they  would  only  wish  to  have  changed  into  the  icorld  of 
spirits,  which  might  or  might  not  be  hell.  But  for  these- 
twenty  lines,  the  other  symbolic  books  give  us  discussions 
under  various  captions,  to  the  amount  of  from  fifty  to  a 
hundred  pages,,  in  which  they  not  only  several  times  repeat 
these  general-  positions,  but  also  add  about  fifty  specifica- 
tions, and  related  topics  which  are  not  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession.  The  major  part  of  them  were  regarded  as  true, 
but  others  as  erroneous.  Among  them  are  such  topics  as 
the  following:  1.  That  God  is  man  and  man  is  God.  2. 
That  the  Virgin  Mary  did  not  conceive  and  bring  forth  a 
mere  man  but  the  true  Son  of  God,  and  therefore,  she  is  the- 
Mother  of  God.  3.  That  it  is  right  to  say,  that  God  suf- 
fered and  died  for  us.  4.  That  it  was  not  the  mere  human- 
ity of  Christ  that  suffered.  5.  That  the  divine  and  human 
natures  of  Christ  communicate  their  attributes  and  properties 
to  each  other.  6.  That  there  are  three  species  of  this  com- 
munication. 7.  That  Chri-st,  in  his  human  nature  also, 
is  omniscient,  omnipotent,  and  omnipresent.  8.  That  he  ac- 
quired omnipotent  power  in  his  mother's  womb.  9.  That 
ihefesh  of  Christ  is  a  life-giving  food,  (also,  ist  das  Fleisch 


INVOLVE    THE    OTHER    SYMBOLS.'  181 

Christi  eine  lebendigmachende  Speise.)  10.  That  the  body 
of  Christ  received  a  certain  glorification  and  majesty,  not 
only  after  his  resurrection,  and  at  his  ascension  to  heaven, 
but  at  the  time  when  he  was  conceived  in  the  womb.  1 1. 
That  the  one  body  of  Christ  can  be  present  at  any  place  in 
three  different  ways.  We  are  prepared  to  support  all  these 
topics  by  explicit  quotations  from  the  several  symbolical 
books ;  but  they  would  occupy  more  space  than  can  be 
allowed.  Now,  if  our  readers  will  examine  these  specifica- 
tions, they  will  find  that  not  one  of  them  is  contained  in  the 
Augsburg  Confession  above  quoted.  So  we  might  pass  over 
all  the  articles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  show  that 
a  vast  multitude  of  specifications  is  found  in  the  other  books, 
which  are  not  contained  in  the  Augsburg  Confession.  It 
will  be  seen,,  too,  that  some  of  these  specifications' are,  to 
say  the  least,  very  doubtful ;  and  others  obviously  erroneous 
and  unscriptural.  How  it  should  follow,  that  whoever  re- 
ceives the  Augsburg  Confession,  either  ought  or  can  also 
receive  or  bind  himself  to  this  host  of  additional  tenets,  we 
confess  ourselves  at  a  loss  to  perceive.  We  freely  acknowl- 
edge that  we  can  neither  see  nor  feel  any  such  obligation,, 
either  logical,  or.  theological,  or  ecclesiastical,  or  moral. 

But  admitting  that  there  is  no  obligation  of  any  kind  to 
receive  all  these  books,  and  bind  ourselves  to  believe  their 
contents ;  is  it  expedient,  would  it  conduce  to  the  glory  of 
God,  would  it  advance  the  interests  of  our  church  ?  Most 
certainly  not.  As  the  difficulty  of  all  assenting  to  any 
creed  is  increased  just  as  we  augment  the  number  of  minor 
and  less  important  specifications  in  it;  and  as  even  the 
Augsburg  Confession  contains  a  few  minor  items,  which  the 
great  mass  of  our  ministers  and  laymen  do  not  believe ;  it 
would  be  evident.folly  to  attempt  to  bind  us  to  books  con- 
taining ten  times  as  many  more  such  minor  and  doubtful 
points.  The  attempt  would  unavoidably  give  rise  to  end- 
less contentions,  and  must  necessarily  terminate  in  divisions 
of  the  church.  Moreover,  as  our  church  has  been  signally 
blessed  of  God  with  doctrinal  purity  and  doctrinal  harmony 
under  the  General  Synod's  doctrinal  basis,  for  more  than  a 
quarter  of  a  century ;  why  should  we  not  adhere  to  it,  and 
devote  our  energies  to  supplying  the  destitute  of  our  church 
over  the  land  with  the  preached  gospel  ?  If  desired,  let  us 
add  the  Maryland  Synod's  explanation  of  the  pledge,  by 
16 


152    NO    FORMAL    RECEPTION    OF    THE    SYMBOLS 

enumerating  what  articles  are  fundamental;  which  ex- 
presses exactly  what  the  pledge  was  intended  to  convey. 
The  discord  and  diversity  which  have  in  some  regions 
marred  the  peace  of  our  Zion,  had  no  reference  to  doctrine, 
and  admit  of  no  doctrinal  remedy.  They  originated  and 
consisted  in  particular  measures,  and  especially  in  violations 
of  our  Formula  of  Government  and  discipline,  which  strictly 
forbids  all  noise  and'  disorder  in  the  worship  of  God.  The 
remedy  for  these  is  already  provided  by  the  General  Synod 
in  her  Formula ;  let  the  attention  of  those  who  lament  these 
disorders,  where  any  prevail,  be  directed  to  enforcing  the 
provisions  of  the  Formula,  and  all  will  be  well.  At  the 
same  time,  let  them  demonstrate  to  the  disorderly,  that 
their  zeal  for  order  does  not  arise  from  want  of  zeal  for  re- 
ligion, by  redoubling  their  efforts  to  promote  orderly  prayer 
meetings,  and  orderly  Special  Conferences,  for  the  purpose  of 
awakening  and  converting  sinners  and  edifying  believers, 
and  thus  winning  souls  to  Christ.  Let  the  catechetical  in- 
struction of  the  rising  generation  be  more  faithfully  attended 
to,  wherever  it  has  been  neglected ;  and  children  be  taught 
to  love  the  institutions  of  the  church  as  administered  in  our 
own  denomination.  Let  them  be  taught  to  love  the  biblical, 
liberal,  spiritual  features  of  our  Lutheran  Zion,  and  the 
days  of  peace  and  harmony  among  pious  Lutherans,  the 
days  of  conversions  and  orderly  genuine  revivals,  where 
they  have  disappeared,  will  again  return  to  bless  us. 


CHAPTER  ill. 

The  symbolical  books  of  our  church  in  Germany  never, 
formally  adopted  in  this  country,  though  practically 
used  in  different  cases  till  near  the  close  of  the  last 

CENTURY. 

The  next  position  claiming  our  attention  is,  That  our  church 
in  America  has  never  formally  adopted  the  symbolical  boohs  of 
the  Lutheran  church  of  the  sixteenth  century;  though  indivi" 


BY  OUR  LUTHERAN  FATHERS.         183 

xh\a\  congregations  had  acknowledged  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession at  the  erection  of  their  churches,  and  in  some  cases 
assent  to  the  symbols,  and  especially  to  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  had  been  required  at  licensure  and  ordination. 
By  this  we  mean  that  no  considerable  or  respectable  Lu- 
theran Synod  or  convention  of  Lutheran  ministers  in  this 
country  ever  passed  a  resolution  and  published  it,  acknowl- 
edging the  authority  of  the  former  symbolical  books  of  our 
church  in  Germany,  or  of  any  of  them  as  binding  on  them 
and  on  all  who  would  unite  with  their  body,  until  it  was 
done  within  the  last  few  years  by  several  German  Synods 
of  the  West. 

1.  It  is  true  that  die  Governor  and  Directors  of  New  Am- 
sterdam, (New  York,)  then  a  Dutch  colony,  had  concluded 
that  the  doctrines  of  the  Auo-sbur^  Confession  might  be  tol- 
erated  there,  and  therefore  that  the  Lutherans  might  worship 
in  private  till  they  could  obtain  a  minister.  But,  were  these 
grave  dignitaries,  the  Governor  and  Directors  of  New  York, 
the  ''Lutheran  church"  in  America,  when  they  did  not  even 
belong  to  the  Lutheran  congregation  ?  And  was  their  action 
the  action  of  "our  church?"  And  if  they  had  even  been 
Lutherans,  was  their  resolution  to  tolerate  worship  according 
to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  a  resolution  to  make  the  whole 
mass  of  the  symbolical  books  binding?  Nor  does  the  fact 
that  the  members  of  that  church  styled  themselves  "United 
members  of  the  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession"  prove  any 
more.  It  shows  that  those  members  professed  to  believe  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  a  part  of  the  symbolical  books,  one 
out  of  half  a  dozen  of  them,  but  not  that  even  they  received 
the  whole  of  these  books,  much  less  was  their  giving  them- 
selves this  name  the  action  of  the  church,  or  of  a  part  of  it, 
formally  adopting  the  symbolical  books  as  binding. 

2.  Again,  the  Saltzburg  emigrants  also  professed  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Augsburg  Confession  in  Germany,  and  whilst 
there  contracted  with  the  Trustees  of  the  colony,  that  several 
ministers  should  be  maintained  among  them,  to  preach  to 
them  the  word  of  God  "according  to  the  purport  of  their 
own  confession,"  and  that  they  should  "  protect  them  in  the 
free  exercise  of  their  religion  according  to  the  import  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  other  symbolical  books  of  the  Evan- 
gelical church"  Now,  although  this  latter  phrase,  and  ' '  other 
symbolical  books"  of  the  Evangelical  church,  was  not  of  their 


184  CASE    OF    THE    GERMAN, 

own  selection,  but  was  contained  verbatim  in  the  offer  or 
invitation  sent  from  England  to  Rev.  Ursperger  to  induce 
emigrants  to  go  to  Georgia,  and  accepted  by  them;  still  admit- 
ting that  these  emigrants  who  were  nearly  all  "  farmers  or  me- 
chanics, day-laborers  or  domestics,"  had  all  seen  and  read 
all  the  symbolic  books,  which  is  certainly  a  very  liberal  conces- 
sion, what  does  it  prove  ?  It  establishes  the  fact  that  these 
emigrants  professed  the  doctrines  of  the  symbolical  boohs  in 
Germany,  and  intended  to  adhere  to  the  same  faith  in  this 
country,  a  point  -which  we  have  already  asserted  of  the 
early  Lutherans  in  general.  But  were  these  Saltzburgers, 
when  in  Germany,  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  country,  or 
even  as  yet  a  part  of  it?  And  could  this  contract,  which 
they  formed  there,  with  any  propriety  be  adduced  to  prove 
that  our  church  in  this  country,  or  even  that  they,  when  they 
subsequently  became  a  part  of  it,  passed  a  resolution,  or 
took  any  public  step  formally  adopting  the  symbolic  books 
as  binding  on  their  churches  here  ?     Certainly  not. 

3.  In  regard  to  the  founders  of  our  church  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, the  facts  in  the  case  incontestably  prove  that  "our 
church  never  formally  adopted"  the  symbolic  books,  that  is, 
that  no  synod  or  convention  ever  passed  an  act  declaring  the 
symbolical  books  binding  on  themselves,  and  to  be  required 
of  all  who  wished  to  unite  with  them.  The  question, 
whether  the  patriarchs  of  our  church  adopted  these  sym- 
bols formally,  or  substantially,  is  immaterial  in  reference  to 
our  present  duties.  The  obligation  of  the  present  genera- 
tion of  our  ministers,  both  in  honor  and  religion,  depends 
simply  on  the  question,  whether  they  individually  bound 
themselves  at  their  licensure  or  ordination,  to  receive  any 
other  symbol  than  the  Bible.  If  not,  then,  by  no  course  of 
legitimate  reasoning  can  a  mass  of  human  productions,  twice 
as  large  as  the  whole  New  Testament,  be  imposed  upon 
them,  as  binding  on  their  consciences. 

4.  As  to  the  little  handful  of  Swedish  Lutheran  churches, 
— they  have  long  since  been  swallowed  up  by  the  Episcopa- 
lians, and  there  is  not  even  a  single  congregation  of  them 
that  has  retained  its  Lutheran  profession.  However  pious, 
and  noble-minded  and  liberal,  some  of  their  ministers  were, 
they  were  the  servants  of  their  ecclesiastical  superiors  in 
Sweden,  from  whom  they  derived  their  subsistence  and  un- 
der whose  instructions  they  acted,  to  which  they  no  doubt 


DUTCH    AND    SWEDISH    LUTHERANS.  185 

conformed.  But  they  never  had  the  right  formally  to  resolve 
to  accept  or  reject  the  symbolical  books,  unless  they  wished 
to  lose  their  support,  which  was  paid  from  Sweden,  and  be 
dismissed  from  the  Swedish  churches.  It  is  undoubtedly 
true,  that  the  instructions  sent  from  Sweden,  to  Governor 
Printz,  directed  that  the  worship  of  the  church  of  the  colony 
should  be  conducted,  according  to  the  symbolical  books  and 
usages  of  the  Swedish  church.  But  we  certainly  need  not  in- 
form the  reader,  that  their  ecclesiastical  superiors  in  Sweden 
were  not  the  Lutheran  church  in  America  ;  nor  is  it  supposable 
that  these  Swedish  ministers  after  their  arrival  in  this  coun- 
try, ever  formally  adopted  a  resolution  that  the  symbolic 
books  should  be  regarded  as  binding  on  them,  for  thai/  was 
a  matter  of  course.  Still,  it  should  not  be  forgotten,  that 
the  Swedish  church  in  Europe  did  not  receive  any  other 
Lutheran  symbol  than  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  Lu- 
ther's Smaller  Catechism  :  so  that  these  Swedish  churches 
on  the  DelaAvare  also  certainly  rejected  all  the  other  books. 
On  the  whole,  then,  it  appears  that  not  one  of  all  these  case3 
bears  on  the  point,  whether  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  coun- 
try ever  formally  adopted  the  symbolical  books  or  not,  except- 
ing the  several  individual  cases  of  ordination,  in  which  a 
pledge  was  in  fact  required.  And  in  several  of  these  the 
specific  contents  of  the  pledge  are  not  known,  though  they 
doubtless  embraced  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  possibly 
also  the  other  symbolical  books.  These  cases  prove  the 
practical  adoption  of  at  least  a  part  of  the  symbolical  books ; 
but  do  not  touch  the  formal  adoption  of  either  a  part  or  the 
whole  by  our  American  church. 

In  corroboration  of  this  position,  Ave  add  a  few  remarks. 
It  is  reasonable  to  suppose,  that  if  the  founders  of  our 
American  church,  had  formally  adopted  even  the  Augsburg 
Confession  alone,  or  all  the  symbolic  books,  at  any  synod  or 
convention,  they  would  have  recognized  these  books  as 
symbolic  in  some  part  or  other  of  their  liturgies  or  svnod- 
ical  constitutions.  But  in  their  liturgy  of  1786,  even  the 
Augsburg  Confession  is  no  where  mentioned,  much  less  the 
other  symbolic  books  ;  excepting  a  direction  that  Catechu- 
mens shuold  study  Luther's  Ca:echism.  In  the  liturgy  of 
1818,  there  is  a  formulary  for  ordination,  containing  the 
prayers,  address,  and  even  the  questions  proposed  to  the 
candidates ;  but  neither  the  Augsburg  Confession  nor  any 
16a 


136  THE    NATURE     OF    THE    SAVIOUR'S 

speak)  namely,  the  Godhead  does  not  suffer  ;  still  the  person 
which  is  God,  suffers  in  its  other  part,  that  is  in  its  humanity 
(denn  obwohl  das  eine  Stueck  (dasz  ich  so  rede)  als  die 
Gottheit  nicht  leidet ;  so  leidet  dennoch  die  Person,  welehe 
Gott  ist,  am  andern  Stuecke,  als  an  der  Menschheit.)  Thus 
we  say,  The  king's  son  has  a  sore,  and  yet  it  is  only  his  leg 
that  is  affected :  Solomon  is  wise,  and  yet  it  is  only  his  soul 
which  possesses  wisdom  :  Absalom  is  beautiful,  and  yet  ifc 
was  only  his  body  that  is  referred  to  :  Peter  is  gray,  and 
yet  it  is  only  his  head  of  which  this  is  affirmed.  For  as  soul 
and  body  constitute  but  one  person,  every  thing  which  hap- 
pens either  to  the  body  or  the  soul,  yea  even  to  the  smallest 
member  of  the  body,  is  justly  and  properly  attributed  to  the 
whole  person.  This  mode  of  expression  is  not  peculiar  to 
the  Scriptures,  but  prevails  throughout  the  world,  and  is 
also  correct.  Thus  the  Son  of  God  was  in  truth  crucified 
for  us,  that  is,  the  person  which  is  God  ;  for  this  person,  I 
say,  was  crucified  according  to  its  humanity."  (Luth.  Works, 
Jena  edit.  vol.  3,  p.  457.)  Yet  Luther,  also,  sometimes  em- 
ployed language  inconsistent  with  the  statements  which  he 
here  makes.  The  theory  above  referred  to,  was  claimed  by 
its  advocates  as  a  legitimate  sequence  of  the  hypostatic  union 
of  the  two  natures  of  Christ,  and  is  known  as  the  Commu- 
nicaiio  Idiomatum,  or  supposed  reciprocal  communication  of 
attributes  between  the  two  natures  of  the  Saviour,  one  re- 
sult of  which  is  to  be,  that  his  body  now  possesses  ubiquity; 
and,  therefore,  can  not  only  be  present  simultaneously 
wherever  the  Holy  Supper  is  administered,  but  actually  is 
present  every  where  else  in  the  universe.  In  support  of  this 
opinion  several  Scripture  passages  are  alleged : 

Coloss.  ii.  9.  For  in  him  dwelleth  the  fullness  of  the  God- 
head, bodily  "  (fuparixus.  This  passage,  we  think,  naturally 
signifies,  in  Christ  the  real,  not  imaginary,  the  full  divinity 
and  not  an  inferior  deity  dwells ;  that  is,  with  his  human 
nature  the  truly  divine  nature  is  really,  not  figuratively,  or 
typically,  but  actually  united  Cwjutccnxcos  personally,  that  is, 
into  one  person.  This  signification  of  the  term  cuxa,  as  sig- 
nifying person,  is  found  both  in  the  N.  T.  and  in  classic 
Greek.  James  iii.  6.  So  is  the  tongue  among*  our  mem- 
bers  that  itdefileth  the  whole  body,  i.  e.  person  (oa.cv  to  cwjuta,) 
for  certainly  the  fact,  that  "the  tongue  is  a  world  of  in- 
iquity," does  not  consist  in  its  polluting  the  literal  body,  but 


PRESENCE    IN    THE    EUCHARIST  137 

the  person,  the  character  of  the  individual.  Thus  also 
Xenophon  uses  tfw/jiara  sXsu^spa,  for  freemen,  free  persons. 
Lycurgus,  and  Aeschynes  employ  rfw.aa  in  the  same  sense, 
to  signify  a  person.  The  same  usage  meets  us  in  the  Latin 
language :  Longeque  ante  omnia  corpora  Nisus  emicat. 
^Eneid  v.  1.  318,  where  the  reference  is  to  the  person  in  gen- 
eral. And  even  in  our  own  tongue,  the  term  body  has  the 
same  meaning,  in  such  phrases  as  "  some  body,"  "  no  body," 
&c,  for  some  person,  no  person,  &c. 

John  iii.  34.  "  For  God  giveth  not  the  Spirit  by  measure 
unto  him,"  (but  dpsrpws).  This  may  signify,  that  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Holy  Spirit  did  not  rest  on  the  Saviour,  only 
at  particular  times  and  in  a  limited  degree,  as  it  did  on  the 
prophets  of  the  Old  Testament;  but  at  all  times  and  in  an 
unlimited  degree.  Or  the  idea  may  be,  that  the  actual  or 
entire  divinity  dwelt  in  him,  i.  e.  was  personally  united  with 
him.  But  there  is  certainly  no  intimation  in  it  of  the  transfer 
of  the  divine  attributes  to  the  humanity  of  Christ. 

Matth.  xxviii.  13.  "All  power  (racra.  s^Cia  all  authority, 
not  iro.ia  S.vay.i:)  is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth." 
This  certainly  does  not  signify  power,  omnipotence  ;  but  all 
or  full  authority  to  command  and  direct  all  things  on  earth 
to  the  accomplishment  of  the  purposes  of  his  mediatorial 
reign. 

In  this  sense  the  word  (sfstfia),  translated  power  in  the 
passage  under  consideration,  is  often  employed  in  the  New 
Testament.  Thus,  Matth.  xxi.  23,  the  chief  priests  and 
elders,  came  to  him,  when  he  was  teaching,  and  said:  "By 
what  authority  (ifstfia)  doest  thou  these  things  ?"  And  (vii. 
29,)  the  people  were  astonished  at  his  doctrine,  "For  he 
taught  them  as  one  having  authority  (sgia'-a),  and  not  as  the 
scribes."  In  the  same  general  sense,  as  signifying  author- 
ity, libertv,  &c,  having  no  reference  to  omnipotence  or 
physical  power,  this  word  is  employed  in  many  other  pas- 
sages, so  that  the  declaration  of  the  Saviour:  "All  power 
or  authority  is  given  to  me,"  has  no  necessary  reference  to 
physical  power  or  omnipotence.  See  Matth.  ix.  6.  Mark 
ii.  10.  Luke  v.  24.  1  Cor.  ix.  4,  13.  2  Thess.  iii.  9.  In 
perfect  accordance  with  this  import,  is  the  classic  usage 
of  the  word  e  s  '  a,  as  signifying  "licentia,  potesfcas,  aucto- 
ritas,  jus  sive  facultas  moralis;  at  tJuvavi:  vis  activa  sou 
facultas  naturalis"  licence,  power,  authority,  a  moral  right; 
12a 


188  THE    AUGSBURG    CONFESSION 

A  shrewd  observer  of  human  nature  once  remarked,  that 
":  names  are  things;"  and  things  they  doubtless  are  in  the  im- 
portance of  their  results,  although  in  the  language  of  the 
schools,  they  are  but  signs  of  our  ideas.  It  cannot  be  de- 
nied, a  large  portion  of  mankind,  learned  and  unlearned, 
are  often  deceived  by  the  mere  indefinite  or  figurative  use 
of  words.  Of  this  we  have  a  striking  example  in  the  opin- 
ion under  consideration,  namely,  that  our  church  was 
founded  on  the  historical  basis  of  these  symbols,  and  there- 
fore the  practical  rejection  of  them  by  the  church  subse- 
quently, cannot  remove  her  from  this  basis.  A  brief  analy- 
sis of  this  opinion  will  demonstrate  its  fallacy.  By  our 
church  is  meant  the  members  who  constituted  it  at  any  par- 
ticular time,  and  by  our  church  at  the  period  of  its  founda- 
tion, is  to  be  understood  the  mass  of  its  members  at  the 
time  of  their  organization  into  a  regular  ecclesiastical  so- 
ciety in  this  Western  world,  and  not  their  successors  in  any 
other  age.  To  be  historically  founded,  signifies  to  be  founded 
in  history,  that  is,  to  be  proved  by  events  which  are  matters 
of  historic  record.  What,  then,  are  the  historical  facts  con- 
nected with  the  organization  of  our  church  as  recorded  in 
history  ?  They  have  constituted  the  topics  of  a  large  por- 
tion of  the  discussions  in  this  essay  and  are  briefly 
these :  That  the  founders  of  our  church,  who  probably  had 
assented  to  the  symbolical  books  in  Germany,  also  in  vari- 
ous informal  ways  avowed  their  belief  of  those  doctrines 
here — that  in  several  cases  they  required  assent  to  one  or 
all  of  these  books  at  licensure  and  ordination,  and  at  the 
erection  of  church  edifices, — but  that  they  never  formally, 
that  is,  by  a  resolution  of  Synod,  adopted  any  of  these 
books  as  symbolical  or  binding,  as  tests  of  admission  or  dis- 
cipline— and  that  •subsequently,  about  the  close  of  last 
century,  whilst  some  of  the  earlier  ministers  were  yet  lin- 
gering on  the  stage  of  action,  and  mingling  in  their  coun- 
sels, they  wholly  relinquished  the  practice  of  requiring 
assmt  to  any  thing  but  the  Bible.  Now  was  there  any 
thing  in  these  events  binding  future  ages?  Nay,  did  not 
these  devoted  men  practically  decide,  by  ceasing  to  use  and 
thus  practically  rejecting  the  symbolic  authority  of  these 
books,  that  they  themselves  were  not  bound  by  their  own 
previous  action,  after  they  ceased  to  regard  it  as  proper? 
In  short,  there  is  a  difference  between  history  and  prophecy. 


ALONE    VIRTUALLY    AVOWED.  189 

The  one  relates  only  the  past,  the  other  the  future.  A  his- 
torical basis  involves  no  obligation  on  future  ages,  other 
than  they  approve  and  voluntarily  assume.  Thus  did  Lu- 
ther reason.  He  well  knew  that  the  errors  and  superstitions 
of  Rome  were  "historically  founded"  in  the  decrees  of 
councils,  bulls  of  popes,  the  Romish  missal,  &c.  But  did 
he  say,  "therefore  I  must  not  oppose  them?  Or,  if  I  wish 
to  advocate  other  views,  I  must  withdraw  from  the  church 
thus  historically  founded  on  these  errors  ?"  Every  tyro  in 
history  will  answer  no.  He  began  to  inveigh  against  these 
corruptions  because  he  regarded  them  unscriptural,  and  he 
persevered  in  doing  so  for  years,  without  the  least  thought 
of  withdrawing  from  the  church,  until  he  saw  that  he  was 
to  be  excommunicated,  and  then  he  committed  the  papal 
bull  to  the  flames,  and  renounced  all  connexion  with  the 
church  of  Rome.  As  genuine  disciples  of  Luther,  we, 
therefore,  recognize  no  binding  authority  in  the  "historical 
foundation"  referred  to,  as  depriving  us,  in  any  degree,  of 
our  natural  and  individual  obligations  and  rights. 


CHAPTER  V. 


The  voluntary  and  personal  nature  of  ecclesiastical 
obligations:  and  the  obligation  of  the  church  in 
every  successive  age  to  conform  her  confession  to  the 
word  of  God. 

The  position  now  claiming  our  attention  is  the  fifth  in  the 
series,  as  formerly  enunciated  : 

5.  That  ecclesiastical  obligations  are  voluntary  and  personal; 
and  not  either  hereditary  or  compulsory.  Hence  the  church, 
that  is,  the  ministry  and  laity  of  every  age,  have  as  good  a 
right,  and  are  as  much  under  obligation  to  oppose,  and,  if 
possible,  to  change  what  they  believe  wrong  in  the  religious 
practice  of  their  predecessors  and  to  conform  it  to  the  word  of 
God,  as  were  Luther  and  the  other  christians  of  the  sixteenth 
century. 


ISO  NATURE     OF    ECCLESIASTICAL 

In  order  fully  to  appreciate  the  truth  and  force  of  this 
position,  we  must  recur  to  first  principles.  What,  then,  is 
the  church,  whose  obligations  we  are  discussing?  In  a 
former  chapter  we  showed,  that  in  the  view  of  the  inspired 
Paul,  the  "Church"  consisted  of  persons,  not  of  things; 
and  of  individuals,  not  of  an  abstract,  ideal,  corporate  per- 
sonality. Pie  describes  it  as  embracing  "those  that  are 
sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus,  called  to  be  saints,  with  all  that 
in  every  place  call  upon  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord." 
1  Cor.  i.  2.  In  full  accordance  with  this  is  the  view  of 
Luther,  who  defines  the  church  to  be  "the  congregation, 
number  or  assemblage  of  all  christians  in  all  the  world,  who 
are  the  only  bride  of  Christ  and  his  spiritual  body."  l  Me- 
lancthon  says  the  visible  church  is  the  "  ccetus  vocatorum 
seu  profitentium  evangelium,"  the  assemblage  of  the  called, 
or  of  those  who  profess  the  Gospel.  The  New  Testament 
introduces  us  to  a  number  of  such  churches,  as  that  at  Jeru- 
salem, at  Corinth,  at  Ephesus,  at  Rome,  <fec.  From  all  that 
is  said  of  these  churches,  the  following  points  are  indispu- 
tably established,  as  well  as  by  other  evidence  from  Scripture 
and  reason : 

1.  That  the  church  is  no  where  spoken  of  as  an  abstract, 
corporate  mass,  or  an  ideal  body  possessing  substantive  person- 
ality opart  from  its  members  at  any  time  constituting  it, 
according  to  the  Puseyite  or  Romish  notion  ;  nor  as  serving 
as  a  reservoir  to  contain  all  the  spiritual  influences  vouch- 
safed by  God  to  his  children,  and  dispensing  them  through 
her  officers  and  sacraments  to  the  applicants.  Nor  do  they 
speak  of  the  church  as  possessing  or  being  capable  of  pos- 
sessing any  character  such  as  being  faithful  or  unfaithful, 
orthodox  or  heterodox,  that  is  sound  or  unsound  in  the  faith  ; 
except  as  these  attributes  are  applicable  to  the  persons  then 
constituting  the  Church.  Nor  do  they  tell  us  that  the 
church  at  Jerusalem  had  one  confession  of  faith,  and  the 
church  at  Antioch,  or  Rome,  another  and  a  different  one. 
Much  less  do  they  utter  the  remotest  intimation  that  if  the 
persons  constituting  the  church  in  any  particular  age  or 
country  see  fit  to  devise  a  human  system  of  organization, 


(1)  Ich  gkube  dasz  eine  heilige  christliche  Kirch  e  sei  auf  Erden,  "  das 
ist  die  Gemeine  und  Zahl  oder  Versammlung  alter  Christen  in  alter  Welt, 
tlie  einge  Braut  Christi  und  sein  geistlicher  Leib." 


OBLIGATIONS,  191 

consisting  of  confessions,  liturgy,  discipline,  &c,  as  was  first 
generally  done  by  the  successors  of  Luther,  about  fifty 
years  after  the  publication  of  the  Augsburg  Confession; 
that  their  doing  so  places  the  church,  that  is,  professing 
christians,  in  after  ages,  under  the  least  obligation  to  adopt 
such  human  system,  unless  they  believe  it  accordant  with 
the  principles  and  instructions  of  God's  word.  And  as  to 
any  such  creed  being  established  by  civil  government,  and 
enforced  by  civil  disabilities,  it  is  an  outrage  alike  upon  the 
rights  of  man  and  the  character  of  the   Protestant  church. 

2.  We  find  each  of  these  churches  spoken  of  as  a  clmrch 
of  Christ,  not  as  part  of  a  church,  or  as  having  only  a  part 
of  the  privileges  and  duties  belonging  to  his  church  on  earth. 
Nor  do  we  find  that  those  churches  were  bound  together  by 
any  external  stated  bond  of  union ;  nor  that  in  the  apostolic 
age  the  churches  were  connected  together  into  any  synod- 
ical  associations  as  at  present,  much  less  into  different 
denominations  on  the  grounds  of  differences  in  doctrine  or 
forms  of  government  and  worship.  Hence,  if  the  inspired 
apostles  knew  what  is  essential  to  the  valid  organization  of  a 
church  of  Christ  as  well  as  their  uninspired  successors  do, 
it  is  obviously  preposterous  to  suppose  that  any  thing  essen- 
tial was  left  wanting  by  them  ;  or  that  churches  by  asso- 
ciating into  synods  or  denominations,  are  in  any  sense 
more  perfectly  churches  of  Christ  than  was  each  such  indi- 
vidual local  church  in  the  apostolic  age  ;  or  that  they  in  the 
sight  of  God  possess  any  higher  privileges  or  authority. 
Still,  on  the  ground  of  human  expediency,  Synods  and  Gen- 
eral Synods  may  be  and  are  highly  useful ;  if  they  do  not 
impose  a  yoke  on  individual  churches,  but  as  in  our  Ameri- 
can Lutheran  system  of  government,  act  chiefly  as  advisory 
bodies.  The  principle  of  such  union  for  advisory  counsel 
and  co-operation,  is  given  us  in  the  primitive  council  held  at 
Jerusalem ;  and  the  churches  in  every  age  are  at  liberty  to 
employ  it,  as  far  as  experience  proves  it  useful  and  safe. 

3.  Each  individual  member  of  the  Church  is  hound  to  search 
the  Scriptures,  and  to  believe  and  act  for  himself.  It  was  for 
pursuing  this  course  that  the  apostle  Paul  applauded  the 
Bereans  ;  and  it  was  not  only  to  the  apostles,  but  to  his 
hearers  generally  that  the  Saviour  addressed  the  command, 
"Search  the  scriptures,  for  in  them  ye  think  ye  have  eter- 
nal life,  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of  me."     In  short, 


192  NATURE    OF    ECCLESIASTICAL 

reason  and  scripture  combine  to  teach  us  that  God  deals  with 
every  individual  as  a  moral  agent,  possessed  of  certain  ina- 
lienable rights,  and  obligated  to  certain  inalienable  duties ; 
and  the  right  and  duty  of  private  judgment  in  matters  of 
religion  are  so  universally  conceded  as  essential  principles  of 
Protestantism,  that  it  were  superfluous  to  spend  time  in 
establishing  them. 

But  this  principle  of  individual  responsibility  and  of  obli- 
gation to  individual  action  is  still  further  established  by  the 
fact,  that  in  the  day  of  retribution,  when  we  shall  all  appear 
before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ,  He  will  judge  and  dis- 
pense his  retributions  to  every  one  according  to  the  deeds 
done  in  his  body.  Nor  is  the  principle  of  personal  imputa- 
tion admitted  at  this  grand  assize.  Here  our  temporal  situ- 
ation is  often  affected  by  the  conduct  of  our  parents,  and  in 
this  way  the  sins  of  parents  are  often  visited  on  their  chil- 
dren to  the  third  and  fourth  generation.  But  there,  when 
the  Son  of  Man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  he 
will  reward  every  individual  "according  to  Ms  works.*' 
"The  son  shall  not  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  father,  neither 
shall  the  father  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  son.  But  the  soul 
that  sinneth,  ii  shall  die.".  It  there/ore  follows  unavoidably, 
that  our  ecclesiastical,  as  ivell  as  other  obligations,  from  the 
observance  or  neglect  of  which  these  rewards  and  punish- 
ments result,  are  also  personal  and  not  hereditary,  are  vol- 
untary and  not  compulsory,  which  is  the  point  of  our 
proposition. 

4.  As  every  church  is  but  a  collection  of  such  professed 
believers,  each  of  whom  is  under  immediate  responsibility  to 
God  to  make  the  word  of  God  the  paramount  and  only  infalli- 
ble rule  of  his  faith  and  practice,  it  folloivs,  that  as  a  church, 
they  are  all  under  precisely  the  same  obligations,  in  the  dis- 
charge of  all  associated  religious  or  ecclesiastical  duties. 
Hence,  if  the  members  of  a  church  find  a  human  creed, 
professed  by  their  predecessors,  it  is  their  duty  individually 
and  collectively  to  compare  it  with  the  scriptures,  and  if 
found  erroneous,  or  of  injurious  length,  to  have  it  corrected 
by  the  infallible  standard. 

Again,  though  the  churches  may  co-operate  in  any  arrange- 
ment or  association,  not  inconsistent  with  the  precepts  and 
spirit  of  the  scriptures,  such  as  synods,  councils.,  societies, 
&c,  if  experience  proves  them  favorable  to  the  advancement 


0BLIGATI05S.  193 

of  religion  ;  yet  must  they  always  be  watchful,  not  to  forget 
or  renounce  any  of  their  individual  and  inalienable  rights. 
Thus  churches  may  adopt  an  expose  of  their  scriptural 
faith,  long  enough  to  exclude  fundamental  errorists,  as  did 
the  christians  of  the  second,  third  and  fourth  centuries,  in 
receiving  the  so-called  Apostles'  Creed  and  the  Nicene 
Creed.  But  we  cannot  believe  it  justifiable  in  any  church, 
to  adopt  such  extended  creeds  as  include  numerous  articles 
of  doctrine  not  necessary  to  harmonious  co-operation  among 
acknowledged  christians,  and  as  rob  the  members  and  min- 
isters of  the  church  of  that  individual  liberty  in  searching 
the  scriptures,  which  is  our  inalienable  right.  If  our  prede- 
cessors in  the  church,  with  which  we  are  providentially  con- 
nected, have  adopted  creeds,  some  parts  of  which  we  cannot 
believe  to  be  scriptural,  it  is  our  duty  to  publish  our  dissent 
from  such  creeds,  as  well  as  our  agreement ;  and  if  we  dif- 
fer  on  points  which  we  regard  fundamental,  to  reject  such 
creeds  altogether.  This  is  the  view  of  duty  entertained  and 
pursued  by  that  highly  respectable  and  active  portion  of  our 
American  Zion,  the  Congregationalists  of  New  England,  in 
the  reception  of  the  Westminster  Assembly's  Catechism  and 
Confession  of  Faith.  Says  the  Rev.  Dr.  Woods,  late  Pro- 
fessor of  Theology  in  Andover  Seminary,  in  his  letters  to 
Unitarians,  "As  it  is  one  object  of  these  letters  to  make  you 
acquainted  with  the  real  opinions  of  the  Orthodox  in  New 
England,  I  would  here  say  with  the  utmost  frankness,  that 
we  are  not  perfectly  satisfied  with  the  language  used  on  this 
subject  in  the  Assembly's  Catechism.  Though  we  hold  that 
Catechism,  taken  as  a  whole,  in  the  highest  estimation,  we 
could  not  with  a  good  conscience  subscribe  to  every  expres- 
sion it  contains,  in  relation  to  the  doctrine  of  original  sin- 
Hence,  it  is  common  for  us,  when  we  declare  our  assent  tov 
the  Catechism,  to  do  it  with  an  express  or  implied  restric- 
tion. We  receive  the  Catechism  gemra&y,  as  containing  a 
summary  of  the  principles  of  Christianity.  Again,  the  im- 
putation of  Adam's  sin  to  his  posterity,  in  any  sense  whicr> 
those  words  naturally  and  properly  convey,  is  a  doctrine 
which  we  do  not  believe,"  (though  taught  in  that  creed,) — - 
pp.  44,  45.  Thus  the  New  School  Presbyterians  also  dis- - 
believe  the  limited  extent  of  the  atonement,  agreeing  with, 
the  Lutherans  and  Congregationalists  in  the  belief  of  it* 
universality ;  and  they  also  freely  profess  their  dissent  on, 
17 


194  NATURE    OF    ECCLESIASTICAL 

this  point  from  their  Confession  of  Faith.  Exactly  the  same 
is  the  manner  in  which  the  churches  of  the  General  Synod 
receive  the  Augsburg  Confession,  namely  :  with  the  express 
restriction  of  its  binding  authority  to  the  fundamentals  of 
the  gospel,  and  the  admission  of  difference  on  unfundamental 
points.  So  far  from  our  case  being  in  this  respect  unprece- 
dented, it  is  sustained  by  the  example-  of  the  two  most 
respectable  sister  denominations  of  our  lancb  And  this  is  as 
it  should  be.  The  church,  that  is  professing  believers,  should 
alter,  limit,  or  reject  what  is  in  their  judgment  unscriptural 
in  the  creed,  and  not  the  unscriptural  creed  eject  the  mem- 
bers from  the  church.  Or  in  other  words,  in  the  language 
of  our  proposition,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  church  in  every  other 
age  as  much  as  in  that  of  the  Reformation,  to  reform  or  re- 
ject zohat  they  believe  unscriptural  in  the  religious  practices  of 
their  ancestors,  and  to  conform  their  own  to  the  infallible  word 
of  God." 

Our  sixth  proposition  naturally  flows  from  the  preceding  :- 
6.  Whatever  moral  obligation  the  practical  requisition  of 
assent  to  the  Augsburg  Confession  by  our  fathers,  may  have 
imposed  on  themselves  and  those  thus  admitted  by  them,  it  was 
annulled,  when,  by  common  consent,  they  revoked  that  jwactice. 
Our  duties  are  not  created  by  our  opinions  of  them,  but 
arise  from  the  nature  of  things,  and  from  the  relations  we 
sustain  to  the  various  beings  in  the  universe.  Hence,  whilst 
it  is  reasonable  to  expect  us  to  retain  a  practice,  so  long  as 
in  our  opinion  it  is  obligatory ;  if  we  change  our  opinion,  it 
is  equally  proper,  that  we  should  relinquish  it.  It  is  also 
admitted,  that  good  men  ordinarily  do  what  they  regard  as 
obligatory  on  them  ;  hence  their  habitual  conduct  is  a  fair 
index  of  their  viewrs  of  duty.  When,  therefore,  our  fathers 
under  the  influence  of  the  views  they  brought  from  Europe, 
at  first  practically  required  assent  to  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, it  is  a  just  inference  that  they  believed  it  their  duty  to 
do  so.  With  these  views  of  duty,  they  and  those  to  whom  they 
administered  this  pledge,  were  under  obligations  to  adhere 
in  the  ministrations  of  the  sacred  desk,  to  all  the  contents 
of  this  symbol.  This  course  the  christian  public  had  aright 
to  expect  them  to  pursue,  until  they  professed  a  change  of 
opinion.  But  it  is  equally  certain,  and  for  exactly  the  same 
reasons,  that  whenever  they  did  change  their  opinion  of  the 
propriety  of  such  a  course,  not  commanded  in  scripture,  and 


-C  8  L  I  G  A  T  I  O  H  S  .  1  95 

did  in  fact  publicly  abandon  the  practice  of  requiring  any 
other  test  than  the  word  of  God  ;  they  in  like  manner  thus 
published  to  the  world  their  altered  conviction  of  duty, 
which  change  absolved  them  and  all  persons  subsequently 
admitted,  from  any  such  obligation  in  the  view  of  the  pub- 
lic, on  the  ground  of  consistency.  The  reasons  in  both 
cases  are  found  in  the  positions  above  established,  that  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  church,  that  is,  of  christians,  in  every  age, 
to  search  the  scriptures,  and  to  act  out  the  honest  convic- 
tions in  which  such  investigation  results.  To  suppose  that 
the  practical  observance  of  a  custom,  not  enjoined  in  scrip- 
ture, could  impose  obligations,  which  a  change  of  opinion  in 
the  same  persons,  or  in  those  succeeding  them,  could  not 
annul,  and  from  the  observance  of  which  an  equally  pubiie 
practical  rejection  of  it,  would  not  release  us  in  the  eyes  of 
the  christian  community,  is  contrary  to  all  sound  reason,  as 
well  as  the  ethical  principles  of  scripture. 

7.  In  perfect  accordance  with  the  principles  here  evolved, 
was  the  practice  of  the  Great  Reformer.  He  was  trained  up 
in  the  doctrines  and  usages  of  the  church  of  Rome,  he  found 
them  sanctioned  by  the  authority  of  popes  and  councils,  and 
confirmed  by  the  practice  of  many  centuries.  To  crown 
the  whole,  he  had  voluntarily  obligated  himself  by  an  oath, 
when  he  was  created  Doctor  of  -Divinity,  "to  obey  the  church 
of  Rome,  and  not  to  teach  any  doctrines  condemned  by  her.'* 
Nevertheless,  when  in  the  providence  of  God  he  became 
acquainted  with  the  Scriptures,  and  his  continued  study  of 
them  taught  him  the  errors  of  Rome,  he  fearlessly  began 
the  work  of  Reformation,  and  in  disregard  of  councils,  popes 
and  the  holy  mother  church,  and  even  of  his  own  oath, 
which  he  now  regarded  as  null  and  void,  he  prosecuted  the 
work  of  -reform  within  the  church,  and  when  he  found  this 
a  hopeless  enterprise,  finally  anticipated  his  excommunica- 
tion by  renouncing  the  church,  and  commenced  an  indepen- 
dent organization.  Numerous  passages  might  be  cited  in 
which  he  avows  the  principles  involved  in  this  course  of 
action,  and  necessary  to  its  justification. 

Nor  was  Luther  guilty  of  the  inconsistency  of  desiring  to 
impose  upon  others  the  yoke  which  he  had  indignantly  cast 
off.  Never  did  he  wish  any  human  composition,  either  of 
his  own  or  others,  to  be  made  symbolical,  or  binding  on  the 
church.     Nor  was  the  symbolic  system  introduced  into  the 


196  THR    EXAMPLE    OF    LUTHER. 

church  during  his  lifetime,  nor  until  more  than  a  quarter 
of  a  century  after  his  translation  to  a  better  world.  But, 
has  not  the  contrary  been  supposed  to  be  the  case  ?  It  has, 
and  therefore  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  correct  the  error.  The 
true  origin  of  the  symbolic  system  of  servitude  is  thus 
fairly  stated  by  Dr.  Kcellner,  in  his  Symbolik,  (Vol.  I.  pp. 
106,  107:)  "The  symbolical  books,  (as  they  were  after- 
ward styled,)  were  first  merely  an  expression  of  what  2vas 
believed  ;  afterwards  they  became  the  rule  of  what  must  be 
be  believed.  But  where  and  how  this  was  first  done  by 
public  authority,  it  is  very  difficult  to  determine.  The 
traces  and  evidences  of  it  are  often  fallacious  ;  because  cases 
in  which  such  subscription  to  a  creed  was  merely  requested 
and  voluntarily  given,  may  easily  be  adduced  as  cases  in 
which  the  subscription  was  commanded.  It,  however,  ap- 
pears to  be  true,  that  some  individual  symbols  had  so  much 
authority  attributed  to  them,  as  to  be  recommended  as  rules 
of  faith  and  of  instruction,  and  in  some  instances  also  com- 
manded, long  before  the  formation  of  the  Form  of  Concord, 
(which  was  half  a  century  after  the  publication  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession.)  Nevertheless  this  does  not  appear  every- 
where to  have  occurred  at  the  same  time,  and  in  the  same 
manner;  nor  does  the  principle  of  binding  men  to  the  s}Tm- 
bols,  seem  to  have  been  a  universal  and  prevailing  one, 
prior  to  the  formation  of  the  Form  of  Concord,  (i.  e.  1580,) 
or  before  the  prevalence  of  the  controversies  which  origin- 
ated from  its  formation.  But  a  change  took  place  about 
the  time  the  Form  of  Concord  was  composed,  and  on  ac- 
count of  its  formation,  and  after  it.  Prior  to  this  time,  some 
cases  had  occurred,  of  oppressive  coercion  in  matters  of 
faith,  and  of  compulsory  adoption  of  the  symbols  as  a  rule 
of  faith  and  instruction ;  but  afterward  they  became  more 
numerous."  These  positions  he  sustains  by  numerous  au- 
thorities, which  even  fix  the  precise  times,  when,  at  differ- 
ent places,  the  custom  of  demanding  assent  to  these  symbols 
was  first  introduced.  That  distinguished  historian,  Dr. 
Schrceck,  bears  the  following  testimony  as  to  the  time  when 
the  custom  of  requiring  assent  to  the  symbolical  books  was 
generally  introduced  in  the  electorate  of  Saxony.  "This 
oath,  (says  he,)  was  not  prescribed  in  electoral  Saxony  until 
after  the  time  of  the  Form  of  Concord,  when  Christian 
II.,  in  1602,  (more  than  half  a  century  after  Luther's  death,) 


THE  ^EXAMPLE    OF    LUTHER.  197 

prescribed  it.  Subsequently,  in  1661,  (more  than  fifty  years 
later  still,)  the  civil  government  required  it  so  generally, 
that  throughout  the  electorate  of  Saxony  all  preachers, 
schoolmasters  and  officers  at  court  or  elsewhere,  were  re- 
quired to  assume  this  obligation."  Here  we  perceive  that 
although  theological  professors  had  been  required  to  pledge 
themselves  to  the  Augsburg  Confession  at  an  early  day,  as 
we  stated  on  a  former  occasion,  yet  no  such  pledge  was  re- 
quired of  the  ministry  in  general,  until  half  a  century  after 
the  Augsburg  Confession  was  practically  acknowledged  as 
the  expose  of  Lutheran  doctrine,  even  in  the  electorate  of 
Saxony  itself,  the  residence  of  Luther,  and  the  head-quarters 
of  the  church.     Schroeck,  sup.  cit.  vol.  IV.,  pp.  470,  471. 

It  seems  evident,  then,  that  the  habit  of  ascribing  nor- 
mative  or  binding  authority  to  these  books,  though,  in   a 
few  instances,  it  was  done  at  an  early  day,  was  of  gradual 
growth,  and  did  not  become  general  for  half  a  century  after 
the  Augsburg  Confession  was  published  and  used  as  a  profes- 
sion  or  expose  of  faith,   and  many  years  after   the    death 
of  Luther.     But   could    this    be    the    case    if   Luther   had 
from  the  beginning,  or  at  any  time  during  his  life,  desired 
that  these  books  should  possess  this  binding  authority?     Or 
if  this  had  been  his  wish,  as  it  was  so  partially  done,  would 
he  not  have  expressed  his  desire  on  this  subject  ?     Yet  his 
works  contain  no  passage  of  such  import.     On  the  contrary, 
Luther  repeatedly  expressed  his  opposition   to  having  his 
works  regarded  as  binding  upon  the  consciences  of  others. 
In  his  instructions  to  the  visitors  in  the  Electorate  of  Sax- 
ony, he  uses  this  noble  language:   "Nevertheless,  we  can- 
not suffer  this,  (book  of  instructions,)  to  go  forth  as  'rigid 
commands  that  we  mayjiot  issue  new  Popish  decretals,  (auf 
daz  wir  nicht  neue  Psepstliche  Decretales  aufwerfen,)  hut 
only  as  a  historic  description,  and  also  as  a  testimony  and 
Confesssion  of  our  faith,"  not  mere  ceremonies  and  forms 
of  worship.)     In  his  well-known  passage,  protesting  against 
his  followers  being  called  Lutherans,  he  expressly  declares: 
"I will  be  no  one's  master,  (Ich  will  keines  Meister  seyn.)" 
In   his   "Preface   to   the  first  part  of  his  ■■German  works," 
written  in  1589,  only  seven  years  before  his  death,  (vol.  14, 
p.  420,  Walch's  ed.,)  he  says:    "Gladly  would  I  have  seen 
all  my  books  neglected  and  lost."      "  This  was  also  my  opin- 
ion (or  design  meinuug)  when  I  began  the  translation  of 
17a 


198  LUTHER'S    CATECHISMS. 

the  scriptures  themselves,  that  I  hoped  there  would  be  less 
writing  done,  and  more  studying  and  reading  of  the  Scrip- 
tures.    For  all  other  writings  (or  publications)  should  lead 
us  to  the  Bible,  as  St.  John  to  Christ,  (John  iii.  30,)  in  or- 
der that  each  one  might  for  himself  drink  out  of  the  pure  (or 
fresh)  fountain.     For  neither  the  councils,  nor  the  fathers,  nor 
we  ourselves,  can,  by  our  best  and  most  successful  efforts,  make 
as  good  work  as  the  Scriptures,  as  God  himself  has  made." 
"Well,  then,   (since,  as  he  had  just  said,  he  could  not 
prevent  the  republication  of  his  works,)  I  make  the  friendly 
request,  that  whoever  desires,  at  present,  to  possess  my 
works,  (and  he  makes  no  exceptions  of  those  which  have 
since  been  made  symbolic,)  shall  by  no  means  allow  them 
to  hinder  him  from  studying  the  Scriptures  themselves,  but 
shall  regard  them  as  I  regard  the  decrees  and  decisions  of 
the  popes  and  the  books  of  the  sophists  ;    that  is,  occasionally 
to  examine  them  and  see  what  they  have  done,  or  to  calcu- 
late  the  history  of  the  times ;  not  that  I  regard  it  a  duty 
to   study   them,    or   to  practice   what   they   taught.^     Other 
passages  of  similar  import  might  be  added,  but  these  we 
would  fain  hope  are  sufficient  to  confirm  the  positions  of 
Kcellner.  and  to  show  that  Luther  never  wished  any  of  his 
books  to  "be  binding  on  others."     That  he  desired  his  cat- 
echisms to  be  used  as  books  of  instruction,  is  natural  and 
proper.     It  was  for  this  purpose  that  he  composed  them. 
But,  that  he  wished  them  to  be  regarded  as  symbolical,  as 
binding  on  all  who  should  belong  to  the  same  religious  de- 
nomination, is  quite  another  thing,  and  requires  very  differ- 
ent, yea,  positive  evidence. 

But,  if  all  the  above  evidence,  so  satisfactory  in  itself, 
were  obliterated  from  the  pages  of  history,  the  very  lan- 
guage of  Luther  in  his  preface  to  the  Smaller  Catechism, 
should,  we  think,  settle  it  forever.  Not  only  does  it  not 
contain  a  syllable  about  his  wish,  that  it  should  be  regarded 
as  binding;  but  the  reverse.  In  this  preface,  (Baumgarten's 
Concordeinbuch,  pp.  614,  615,)  he  deplores  the  ignorance 
of  the  people,  urges  the  importance  of  elementary  instruc- 
tion, and  begs  those  ministers  who  could  not  make  better  ones 
themselves,  to  use  these  forms  and  tables,  i.  e.  the  catechisms 
which  he  had  prepared.  (Bitte  ich  euch — welche  es  nicht 
Cesser  vcrmacgen,  diese  Tafeln  und  Form  vor  sick  zu  nehmen.) 
And  urging  the  importance  of  adhering  to  the  very  same  words 


LUTHER'S     CATECHISMS.  199 

in  teaching  the  populace  the  decalogue,  the  Lord's  prayer, 
the  Apostles'  creed,  the  sacraments,  &c,  he  says :  There- 
fore select  ichatform  you  choose,  and  adhere  to  it  perpetually, 
(Darum  erweehle  welche  Form  du  wilt,  und  blieb'  dabey 
ewiglich.)  Again,  after  the  pupils  have  committed  to  mem- 
ory the  text,  as  he  terms  it,  that  is,  the  decalogue,  Lord's 
pra}*er,  <fec,  he  urges  the  ministers  to  explain  the  import  of 
them,  and  for  this  purpose,  he  says:  ''Take  again  before 
3rou,  (that  is  use,)  these  tables,  or  some  other  short  method, 
whichever  you  pltase,  and  adhere  to  it,  (Nim  mabermal  vor 
dich,  dieser  Tafeln  Weise,  oder  sonst  einkurze  einige  Weise, 
welche  du  iv'dt,  und  bleib  dabe}?-.)  jSow  all  these  quotations 
are  Luther's  own  declarations,  prefixed  to  the  very  catechism 
in  question,  and  if  they  do  not,  especially  in  connexion  with 
the  mass  of  other  evidence  here  adduced,  utterly  preclude 
the  idea  of  his  having  wished  his  catechism  to  be  regarded 
as  symbolical,  and  as  binding  on  the  Lutheran  church,  we 
confess  our  inability  to  estimate  the  force  of  evidence. 

That  our  estimate  of  the  facts  and  evidence  in  the  case  is 
correct,  is  admitted  by  the  ultra-Lutherans  themselves,  as 
we  will  prove  by  a  quotation  from  Professor  Guericke,  show- 
ing that  even  he  does  not  suppose  that  Luther  designed  his 
catechisms  to  be  symbolical. 

"  As  Luther's  catechisms  (says  he)  were  not  prepared  in 
consequence  of  any  public  resolution,  so  also  they  did  not 
attain  symbolical  authority  by  formal  subscription  to  them, 
but  rather  by  tacit  consent.  They  introduced  themselves 
into  use  every  where,  especially  the  smaller  one,  by  their 
pure  and  animated  simplicity  and  unsurpassable  practical 
concreteness.  Moreover,  the  Form  of  Concord,  also,  for- 
mally and  unequivocally  avows  them,  after  they  had  pre- 
viously been  received  into  several  Corpora  Doctrinee  (or 
collections  of  Confessions  of  Faith)."  Symb.  p.  102.  Now 
if  Guericke  had  supposed  that  Luther  had  designed  these 
catechisms  to  be  symbolic,  would  he  not  have  said  so  when 
he  was  speaking  of  their  origin  and  the  manner  in  which 
they  acquired  symbolic  authority,  and  admitting  that  they 
were  not  declared  symbolic  by  any  ecclesiastical  authority, 
prior  to  that  of  the  Foim  of  Concord,  fifty-two  years  after 
they  were  written.  In  perfect  accordance  with  this  view  is 
the  testimony  of  Keellner.  "  Therefore,  in  just  acknowl- 
edgment of  their  importance  both  for  doctrine  and  religious 


200  DOCTRINAL    POSITION 

practice,  they  were  received  into  the  Corpora  Doctrinae ;  and 
this  importance  and  existing  general  use  also  received  the 
public  sanction  of  the  church,  inasmuch  as  symbolic  authority- 
was  given  them  in  the  Form  of  Concord,  and  thus  secured 
to  them."  Symbolik,  I.  p.  511.  It  seems  therefore  evident 
that  the  symbolic  authority,  even  of  these  catechisms,  was  not 
acknowledged  by  any  act  of  the  church,  till  the  time  of  the 
Form  of  Concord,  long  after  Luther's  death. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

The  actual  doctrinal  position  of  our  church  at  the  time 
of  the  formation  of  the  general  synod,  was  that  of 
adherence  to  the  fundamentals  of  scripture  as  sub- 
stantially taught  in  the  augsburg  confession,  with 
acknowledged  and  professed  dissent  on  non-essential 
aspects  of  doctrine. 

That  the  position  here  affirmed,  namely,  that  of  agreement 
in  fundamentals  with  the  Augsburg  Confession,  together 
with  acknowledged  dissent  on  some  minor  points,  fairly  rep- 
resents the  doctrinal  position  of  our  principal  Synods,  espe- 
cially of  the  mother  Synod  of  Pennsylvania,  and  of  those 
connected  with  the  General  Synod,  we  know  from  extensive 
intercourse  with  them,  both  personal  and  epistolary.  We 
believe  there  are  a  very  few  ministers  in  the  Synod  of  Penn- 
sylvania who  hold  the  doctrine  of  the  bodily  presence,  &c; 
but  we  have  yet  to  hear  of  one  that  desires  to  force  these 
views  upon  his  brethren.  In  corroboration  of  our  opinion, 
we  shall,  I.  Present  general  statements  concerning  the  doc- 
trinal position  of  our  church  during  the  last  quarter  of  a 
century.  II.  Adduce  more  specific  testimony  in  regard  to 
individual  synods  and  persons,  especially  the  Synod  of  North 
Carolina  and  Rev.  Shober  and  S.orke.  III.  Prove  by  the 
declaration  and.  acts  of  the  General  Synod  herself  that  she 
has  always  held  the  same  position.  We  begin  with  the  tes- 
timony of  one  of  our  mosi  aged  and  respected  divines,  Dr. 


OF    THE    CHURCH.  201 

Hazelius,  whose  partiality  for  church  history  is  well  known, 
and  who  has  enjoyed  unusually  favorable  opportunities  of 
acquaintance  with  the  views  of  our  church  in  the  Northern, 
Middle  and  Southern  States. 

1.  Dr.  Hazelius.  In  the  Annotations  on  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  prefixed  to  the  "  Discipline,  &c,  of  the  Synod 
of  South  Carolina,"  (pp.  20-23,)  Dr.  Hazelius  says:  "  That 
Luther  and  the  Reformers  who  labored  with  him,  entertained 
the  idea  of  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  is 
undeniable ;  but  it  is  also  well  known,  that  the  sentiments 
of  Luther  concerning  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the  Sup- 
per have  not  always  been  fully  received  in  the  Lutheran 
Church.  Melancthon  departed  from  them,  and  many  of  our 
divines  of  the  seventeenth  century,  otherwise  strict  adher- 
ents to  the  doctrines  of  Luther,  moderated  the  expressions 
of  the  great  Reformer  in  such  a  manner  that  few  Protestant 
christians  of  any  other  denomination  could  well  find  fault 
with  their  explanation  of  the  manner  in  which  they  repre- 
sented to  themselves  and  taught  the  presence  of  Christ  in 
the  Eucharist." 

"  The  opinions,  (continues  Dr.  Hazelius,)  now  entertained 
in  the  Lutheran  church  as  to  the  nature  of  the  sacrcment  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  differ  in  no  material  point  from  those  enter- 
tained by  the  other  Protestant  churches  on  the  subject.  We 
believe  that  Christ  instituted  this  sacrament  as  a  means  of 
spiritual  communion  with  him,  as  the  invisible  head  of  the 
church,  and  which  is  to  be  statedly  observed,  until  the  saints 
are  admitted  to  personal  communion  with  him  in  heaven. 
In  it,  the  christian  commemorates  with  devout  feelings  the 
sufferings  and  death  of  Christ  By  means  of  this  ordinance 
the  christian  renews  his  faith,  and  receives  the  spiritual 
blessing  which  the  Saviour  has  promised  to  impart  to  all 
worthy  communicants.  The  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are 
set  forth  in  this  ordinance,  as  the  spiritual  food  of  the 
soul,"  &c. 

"If,  however,  (proceeds  the  Doctor,)  any  of  our  brethren 
should  entertain  sentiments  apparently  more  conformable  to 
the  views  and  language  held  forth  by  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, and  other  writings  of  the  first  Reformers,  we  do  not 
desire  to  disturb  them  in  that  opinion,  inasmuch  as  we  know 
that  the  main  point  in  this,  as  in  every  other  religious  ob- 
servance,  is  the  heart,"   &c.     "At  the  table  of   Christ, 


202  GENERAL    SYNOD'S    ESTIMATE 

they  (Christians  differing  on  minor  points,)  may  forget  their 
minor  differences  and  commune  in  sweet  and  endearing  fel- 
lowship with  each  other  and  their  Lord."  In  this  quotation 
the  italics  are  our  own ;  and  we  doubt  not  the  interest  of  its 
matter  will  fully  justify  its  length. 

These  sentiments,  to  which  we  cordially  assent,  are  fully 
endorsed  by  the  Synod  of  South  Carolina,  by  whom  the 
volume  containing  them  is  officially  published  for  public  use 
in  their  churches.  The  action  of  the  Synod  also  shows  the 
fallacy  of  the  inference,  that  the  -publication  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  by  the  Hartwlck  Synod,  or  one  of  its  min- 
isters, implies  a  belief  of  all  its  contents,  or  a  desire  or  even 
willingness  to  make  it  binding  in  any  other  manner  than  we 
contend  for,  and  than  is  secured  by  the  General  Synod  in  her 
Constitution  for  Synods.  For  the  same  volume  which  fur- 
nishes us  the  above  extract,  also  contains  the  Constitution 
of  that  Synod,  in  which  the  Augsburg  Confession  is  avowed 
as  the  bond  of  union  in  the  following  terms : 

Art.  II.  "  The  Auo-sbmrof  Confession  of  Faith  shall  be  the 
point  of  union  in  our  churches,  inasmuch  as  we  believe  that 
the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Word  of  God  are  taught 
in  a  manner  substantially  correct  in  the  doctrinal  articles  of 
said  Confession."  In  this  sense  all  the  Synods  belonging  to 
the  General  Synod,  have  received  this  Confession,  and  in 
this  sense  alone,  we  confidently  believe,  would  any  one  of 
these  bodies  be  willing  to  accept  it. 

It  has  been  conjectured  by  some  that  there  has  of  late 
years  been  a  recession  from  the  more  rigid  confessional 
ground  assumed  by  that  body  at  its  formation.  Now,  it  so 
happens,  that  we  were  present  in  Baltimore  in  1019,  when 
the  Rev.  Schober  first,  proposed  his  plan  for  a  General  Synod, 
which  was  very  much  like  that  of  the  Presbyterian  General 
Assembly.  "We  were  present  at  Hagerstown  in  1 820,  when 
the  Constitution  was  definitely  formed  and  adopted ;  and 
we  heard  with  much  attention  all  the  debates  in  both  meet- 
ings. We  have  been  present,  either  as  member  or  visitor, 
and  for  many  years  as  chairman  of  the  Hymn  Book  Com- 
mittee, at  the  meeting  of  every  General  Synod,  save  one, 
that  has  ever  been  held  ;  we  were  intimately  acquainted 
with  those  elder  members  of  that  body  who  have  since  been 
called  to  their  rest,  such  as  Drs.  Endress,  Lochman,  Geis- 
senhainer,    and   Mr.  Schober,   and  we  think  we  ought  to 


05    TH3    AUG  S  BURS    CONFESSION.  203 

anderstand  the  real  views  and  plans  of  that  Synod,  as  fully  as 
any  man  in  our  church.  Now  we  can  assure  our  readers, 
that  instead  of  a  retrograde  movement,  actual  progress  has 
been  made  in  an  opposite  direction.  Our  own  views  coin- 
cided, in  general,  with  those  of  Mr.  Schober.  We  regretted 
the  failure  of  his  efforts  to  have  the  Augsburg  Confession 
substantially  recognized,  or  even  named  in  the  Constitution 
of  that  body  ;  and  after  the  lapse  of  some  years  we  our- 
selves accomplished  the  very  thing,  by  introducing  it  into 
the  Constitution  for  Synods.  To  this  substantial  recognition 
of  the  mother  symbol  of  Protestantism,  the  General  Synod 
still  adheres.  It  is  all  her  most  zealous  friends  ever  desired, 
and  I  trust  that  is  all  that  the  enlightened  friends  of  religion 
and  of  our  church  will  ever  admit.  Our  own  views  of  this 
subject  have  never  changed.  And  the  Professorial  oath  of 
office  in  our  Seminary,  though  written  by  us  as  early  as 
1825,  is  in  exact  conformity  with  this  position.  We  made  it 
express  exactly  what  we  thought  right,  and  what  we  still 
think  every  Professor  of  a  Lutheran  Seminary  ought  to  be 
pledged  to  ;  and  it  is  substantially  the  same  that  is  required 
by  the  Constitution  for  Synods  at  licensure  and  ordination. 
Instead,  therefore,  of  retrogression,  there  has  been  approxi- 
mation to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  in  the  Genera-  Synod 
since  her  formation.  And  the  alleged  recent  growth  of  a 
more  lax  system  among  the  members  of  the  General  Synod, 
is  a  gross  misapprehension  of  the  truth,  as  is  well  known 
to  those  who  personally  participated  in  the  transactions  of 
that  body  from  the  beginning. 

And  why  should  we,  after  the  additional  experience  and 
light  of  more  than  three  centuries,  feel  any  reluctance  in 
departing  from  some  of  the  minor  doctrines  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  ;  when  it  is  certain  that  its  very  author, 
Melancthon  himself,  did  so;  yea,  that  Luther,  the  great 
founder,  not  of  our  religion  indeed,  for  which  we  look  to 
Christ,  but  of  our  organization  as  a  denomination,  did  the 
same  ?  For,  in  his  Smalcald  articles  he  denounces  the  mass 
as  "the  most  horrible  abomination  of  popery,"  though  it  had 
been  "in  a  measure  defended  in  the  Confession,'"'  especially 
in  the  abuses  mutati,  or  articles  concerning  the  corruptions 
of  the  church.  Why  should  we  feel  any  reluctance,  when 
even  the  secular  authorities,  the  Protestant  princes  them- 
sel  ires,  directed  their  theologians  to  re-examine  the  Augsburg 


204  TESTIMONY    OF    DK.     HAZE  LI  US. 

Confession  by  the  inspired  word  of  God,  and  alter  anything 
that  might  be  found  inconsistent  with  that  only  infallible 
rule  ;  and  all  this  seyen  years  after  that  Confession  had 
been  published  and  translated  into  various  languages,  and 
circulated  over  all  Europe  ? 

"If,  therefore,  (we  again  quote  the  judicious  and  appro- 
priate words  of  Dr.  Hazelius, )  every  departure  from  the 
literal  sense  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  amounts  to  a  der- 
eliction  of  Lutheranism,  it  is  certainly  a  source  of  congratu- 
lation and  joy  to  those  who  have  thus  departed,  that  Luther 
and  Melancthon  have  set  them  the  example.  Those  heroes 
of  the  Reformation  never  intended  that  christians  should 
follow  them  in  all  respects,  for  even  they  differed  among 
themselves  in  regard  to  some  opinions  concerning  the  Lord's 
Supper ;  but  they  demanded  that  christians  should  prayer- 
fully study  the  Bible  and  consider  the  authority  of  that 
book  as  paramount  to  all  human  wisdom  and  philosophy." 

"On  this  broad  basis  of  Protestantism  the  American 
Lutheran  churches  are  still  standing ;  charitable  and  liberal 
in  matters  of  minor  importance,  they  are  willing  to  aid  in 
leveling  down  the  partition  walls,  which  are  now  separating 
Protestant  from  Protestant."  This  latter  sentiment,  so  con- 
genial to  the  millennial  glory  of  the  church,  is  fully  expressed 
in  the  General  Synod's  Constitution,  and  itself  dissipates  the 
/  contracted  delusion,  that  the  founders  of  that  noble  institu- 
tion desired  to  recall  to  prominent  attention,  the  sectarian 
peculiarities  of  our  church,  by  restoring  the  obsolete  authority 
of  her  enormous  symbols.  "  The  General  Synod  shall  apply 
all  their  powers,  their  prayers  and  their  means  toward  the 
prevention  of  schisms  among  us,  to  be  sedulously  and  inces- 
santly regardful  of  the  circumstances  of  the  times,  and 
of  every  casual  rise  and  progress  of  unity  of  sentiment  among 
christians  in  general,  in  order  that  the  blessed  opportunities 
to  promote  concord'  and  unity,  and  the  interest  of  the  Redeem- 
ers kingdom,  may  not  pass  by  neglected  and  unavailing." 
Art.  Ill,  §  8.  Such  was  the  exalted,  the  truly  apostolic 
design  of  our  General  Synod,  and  it  were  easy  to  demon- 
strate that  her  action  in  the  promotion  of  Christian  union  in 
general,  as  well  as  unity  in  our  own  church,  has  been 
perfectly  accordant  with  the  principle  thus  avowed. 

2.  Dr.  C.  Endrcss.  Our  next  proof  is  taken  from  a  very 
interesting,  though  extended  Letter  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Undress, 


TESTIMONY    OF    DR.     EN  DRESS.  205 

one  of  the  ablest,  most  distinguished  and  influential  among 
our  oldest  divines.  He  entered  the  ministry  about  the  year 
1794, anb wielded  an  important  influence  in  our  church  as 
one  of  its  leading  spirits  until  his  decease  in  1827.  He  was 
an  able  expounder  of  the  word  of  God,  a  learned  and  en- 
lightened theologian.  He  also  richly  merits  the  grateful 
remembrance  of  our  church  as  one  of  the  most  active  and 
controlling  founders  of  the  General  Synod.  As  the  letter, 
which  was  addressed  to  Rev.  J.  P,  Schindel,  senr.,  Lancas- 
ter, dated  July  25th,  1821,  is  somewhat  miscellaneous  in  its 
contents,  we  shall  barely  allude  to  some  of  its  topics  and 
then  cite  the  portion  more  directly  bearing  on  our  subject. 
Dr.  E.  speaks  with  the  highest  respect  of  the  different  forms 
or  symbols  of  the  Lutheran  church,  as  theological  compo- 
sitions, excepting  the  Form  of  Concord,  concerning  which. 
his  sentiments  cannot  well  be  mistaken:  "We  have  the 
Formula  Concordiae,  in  which  expulsion,  condemnation-, 
anathema  were,  in  the  most  liberal  manner,  pronounced  and 
poured  forth  against  all  those  who  were  of  a  different  opin- 
ion, which,  however,  thank  God,  was  never  received  univer- 
sally, by  the  Lutheran  church.  I  ivoirfd  suffer  both  my  Lands 
to  be  burned  of  before  I  would  subscribe  that  instrument." 

The  Dr.  also  asserts  what  we  have  repeatedly  affirmed, 
that  the  Augsburg  Confession,  like  the  other  symbols,  (ex- 
cept the  Formula  Concordiae, )  was  never  intended  by  its 
authors  to  be  used  as  symbols  to  bind  the  consciences  of 
others,  s-ays  "the  Lutheran  church  existed  in  parts  of  Ger- 
many for  thirteen  years,  and  was  established  throughout 
Saxony  six  years,  and  in  Prussia,  Moravia,  Sweden  and 
Denmark,  several  years  before  even  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion was  written" — "During  this  time  they  distinguished 
themselves  as  Lutherans  by  peremptorily  and  absolutely  re- 
fusing to  receive  or  acknowledge,  as  a  confession  of  faith,  the 
writings  and  dictates  of  man."  This  book  alone  (the  Bible }• 
should  be  and  should  remain  the  foundation  of  their  faith." 

Dr.  Endress  then  quotes  the  opinion  first  of  Melancthon,. 
and  secondly,  of  Luther,  as  follows : 

"Here  they  say  :  Shall  there  be  no  visible  judge  in  the 
church,  and  what  avails  the  judgment  if  it  have  no  power 
from  the  judge?  "To  this  we  give  this  sufficient  answer: 
It  is  God's  will  that  there  should  be  visible  courts  in  the- 
church.  that  they  should  be  truly  upheld,  as  it  is  written  ^ 
18 


206  TESTIMONY    OF    DR.     ENDRESS. 

De  Ecclesia,  and  it  is  not  God's  will  that  blasphemy  or  any 
erroneous  doctrines  should  be  suffered  to  be  propagated." 

"And  this  visible  judge  is  the  church,  i.  e.  pious  ministers 
and  others  ;  this  visible  judge  is,  however,  strictly  bound  to 
God's  Word,  for  these  are  things  from  God,  and  are  con- 
tained in  the  writings  of  the  Prophets  and  Apostles.  There- 
fore shall  no  creature — no  angel — no  man — no  pope — bishop 
— minister,  &c,  set  up  articles  of  faith  or  confessions  against 
God's  Word  or  separated  from  God's  Word — nothing  new 
nor  different  from  the  Holy  Word  of  God." 

"Against  this  the  philosophers  and  wise  men  of  the  world 
say,  the  Scriptures  are  uncertain,  and  are  interpreted  and 
explained  by  one  portion  in  one  way  and  by  others  in  a  dif- 
ferent way :  for  this  reason  the  visible  judge  should  have 
persons  to  decide." 

I  could  not  have  expressed  Melancthon's  opinion  better  in  his 
own  words,  than  I  have  done  in  mine,  before  the  Synod,  with- 
out seeing  the  above.  What  he  says  further  in  his  long 
dissertation,  amounts  to  this  :  That  councils  and  synods  may 
confess  for  themselves.  Their  confession,  however,  is  not 
binding  upon  others ;  but  the  Scriptures  are  binding  upon 
all,  and  that  they  should  oppose  false  doctrines ;  but  should 
not  judge  them  according  to  the  opinion  of  councils,  synods, 
or  confessions  of  faith,  but  according  to  Holy  Writ. 

You  shall  now  hear  Luther's  opinion,  for  fear  you  might 
think  this  was  only  Melancthon's,  although  that  would  be 
sufficient  for  the  attainment  of  my  object,  because  he  wrote 
the  Augsburg  Confession.     Luther  himself  says  : 

"  On  the  other  hand,  to  judge  of  doctrinal  matters,  &c, 
we  must  not  care  for  precepts  of  men,  i.  e.,  for  things  setup 
by  men,  for  laws,  antiquity,  custom  and  usage,  whether  it 
be  of  the  pope  or  the  emperor,  or  prescribed  by  the  princes 
or  bishops,  and  approved  by  the  half  or  whole  of  the  world, 
&c.  For  the  soul  is  an  immortal  thing,  and  must  be  gov- 
erned only  by  the  Eternal  Word,  and  for  that  reason  we 
must  act  agreeably  to  God's  Word.  If  then  the  Word  of 
God  and  the  doctrines  of  men  are  to  govern  the  soul  togeth- 
er, then  will  they  unquestionably  fight  and  war  against  each 
other.  This  we  will  abundantly  prove  by  the  following: 
The  word  and  doctrines  which  men  have  set  and  ordered, 
we  should  leave  to  the  judgment  of  bishops  and  learned 
men  and  councils,  (synods  ?)  what  they  say  should  be  con- 


TESTIMONY    OF    DR.     EN  DRESS.  207 

sidered  by  all  the  world  as  law  and  articles  of  faith.  Behold 
what  honor !  how  indecent  and  foolish  !  It  operates  against 
the  law  and  word  of  God." 

"  For  Christ  establishes  plainly  the  contrary,  and  takes 
this  right  and  power  to  judge  of  doctrine  from  the  bish- 
ops, the  learned  men  and  councils,  and  gives  it  to  every  one 
and  all  christians  in  common.  John  x.  4,  5,  8.  "  The 
sheep  follow  him  ;  for  they  know  his  voice.  And  a  stran- 
ger will  they  not  follow — for  they  know  not  the  voice  of 
strangers.  All  that  ever  came  before  me  are  thieves  and 
robbers  ;  but  the  sheep  did  not  hear  them."  Here  you  see 
plainly  who  has  the  right  to  judge  of  doctrine.  Bishops, 
popes,  learned  men  and  all  others  have  power  to  teach  ;  but 
the  sheep  shall  judge  whether  it  be  the  voice  of  Christ  or 
that  of  a  stranger.  Friend,  what  can  these  water-bubbles 
say  who  continually  cry,  Councils !  Councils  !  You  must 
hear  the  learned  !  and  you  must  look  to  old  customs  and 
established  ways  !  Do  you  suppose  that  the  word  of  God 
shall  give  way  to  your  old  customs  ?  No — never !  For  that 
reason  we  leave  bishops  and  councils  to  conclude  and  set  up 
what  they  please ;  but  where  we  have  the  word  of  God  we 
shall  stand  with  that  and  not  with  them — they  must  give 
way  to  us  and  to  our  word." 

Here  you  see  Luther's  opinion.  Did  he  not  then  show 
the  difference  between  him  and  the  Romanists  sufficiently? 
At  that  time  there  was  no  confession  written — but  only  the 
Scriptures.  Dear  brethren,  if  we  hold  to  the  Bible  truly, 
sincerely,  and  conscientiously,  we  will  not  be  Romish,  nor 
Calvinistic,  nor  Zwinglians,  nor  Socinians,  nor  Quakers,  nor 
Methodists;  we  shall  distinguish  ourselves  from  them  all ; 
nor  will  we  condemn  any  one  on  account  of  mere  opinion ; 
we  shall,  to  be  sure,  find  with  us  and  among  us  tares  and 
that  until  the  harvest  comes.  The  Lord  will,  however,  never 
permit  the  true  church  to  go  down  by  misinterpretations  of 
the  Bible — "  for  the  foundation  of  God  will  stand  sure  and 
has  this  inscription  :  "The  Lord  knoweth  them  that  are  his." 

As  we  have  (says  Dr.  Endress)  hitherto  received  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  and  Luther's  Catechism,  and  Melanc- 
thon's  Apology,  so  I  have  no  objection  that  they  should  be 
kept  in  the  same  reverence  and  respect  as  our  peculiar  doc- 
uments ;  but  not  to  overrule  the  Bible.  For  by  this  shall  the 
Lutheran  church  for  ever  distinguish  itself  from  all  other 


208  TESTIMONY     OF    DR.     ENDRESS. 

religious  connections,  that  the  Bible — the  Bible  alone  shall 
remain  the  only  sun  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  that  we  rest  upon 
human  declarations  of  faith  only  in  so  far  as  they  receive 
their  lig-ht  more  or  less  from  that  great  light 

Dr.  E.  then  speaks  with  the  utmost  respect  of  the  different 
symbolic  books ;  &nd  closes  in  these  words : 

"What  shall  I  answer  on  the  question  :  What  is  the 
confession  of  faith  of  the  Lutheran  church  ?  Answer :  I 
will  not  dictate  to  you  what  you  should  say  ;  but  if  I  should 
be  asked,  I  would  say,  first,  and  principally,  and  solely,  and 
alone,  the  Holy  Word  of  God  contained  in  the  writings  of 
the  Prophets  and  Apostles.  The  confessions  of  faith  by  the 
church,  of  the  first  four  centuries,  we  hold  in  conformity  with 
the  Bible,  and  receive  them,  as  far  as  I  know,  universally  in 
the  Lutheran  church.  The  confession  of  the  princes  of  the 
German  empire,  presented  at  the  Diet  of  Augsburg,  is  held 
by  all  in  honor  and  respect,  and  when  ice  compare  it  with 
other  human  confessions,  we  give  it  a  decided  preference.  Lu- 
ther's Catechism  is  used  in  all  Lutheran  churches,  and  no 
catechism  of  other  religious  denominations  has  that  honor. 
The  so  called  apology  is  in  possession  of  very  few  Lutheran 
ministers ;  but  whether  they  have  read  it  or  not,  they  con- 
sider it  a  good  book.  The  Smalkald  Articles  I  have  often 
read.  In  Germany  they  are  taken  up  among  the  synods.  I 
know  not  whether  any  other  divine  in  the  Lutheran  church 
in  America  ever  read  it  except  Muhlenberg  and  Lochman. 
In  short  we  hold  firmly  and  steadfastly  to  our  beloved  Bible, 
when  the  one  holds  to  Calvin,  the  other  to  Zwingel,  a  third 
to  the  Heidelberg  Catechism,  a  fourth  to  the  Confesssion  of 
the  Synod  of  Dort,  a  fifth  to  the  Westminster  Catechism,  a 
sixth  to  the  common-prayer  book,  a  seventh  to  the  solemn 
league  and  covenant,  and  the  eighth  to  the  darkened  and 
depraved  reason,  per  se,  the  ninth  to  reason,  under  the  name 
of  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  tenth  to  the  devil  himself  in  the  form 
of  an  angel  of  light.  But  I  will  cleave  to  my  beloved  Bible, 
and  hereby  it  shall  remain.     Amen." 

3.  Rev.  Dr.  Bachman,  in  his  excellent  discourse  on  the 
Doctrines  and  Discipline  of  the  Lutheran  church,  preached  in 
1837,  by  appointment,  before  the  Synod  of  S.  Carolina,  and 
published  by  said  body,  says  "  The  articles  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  contain  the  fundamental  principles  of  our  faith." 
p.  10. 


TESTIMONY    OF    DRS.    BACHMAN,    LINTNER,     209 

w  In  fact,  the  Lutheran  Church  has,  for  a  century  past, 
ceased  to  agitate  this  question,  (i.e.  concerning  the  presence 
and  reception  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  at  the  eucha- 
rist) — leaving  its  members  to  follow  the  dictates  of  con- 
science agreeably  to  the  light  of  Scripture.  This  we  are 
authorized  to  do  without  a  departure  from  the  creed  of  our 
church  ;  since,  at  our  ordination,  in  this  country  especially, 
we  only  profess  to  believe  ''that  the  fundamental  articles  of 
the  word  of  God,  are  taught  in  a  manner  substantially  cor- 
rect, in  the  doctrinal  articles  of  the  Ausburg  Confession." 
p.  24.  By  publishing  this  discourse,  which  the  committee 
of  Synod  justly  style,  ''able,  lucid  and  learned,"  the  breth- 
ren of  that  Synod  naturally  de-signed  to  publish  to  the  world 
their  approval  of  its  views,  which  are  precisely  accordant 
with  what  Ave  have  pronounced  to  be  the  standpoint  of  our 
American  Lutheran  Church,  fundamental  agreement  with  the 
Ausburg  Confession,  with  acknowledged  difference  on  minor 
or  non -fundamental  points. 

4.  Rev.  Dr.  Lintner,  of  Hartwick  Synod,  ISTew  York, 
together  with  Rev.  Messrs.  Crownse  and  D.  Eyster,  and 
Messrs.  Borst  and  Springer,  as  a  committee  of  said  Synod, 
in  the  preface  to  their  edition  of  the  Ausburg  Confession, 
published  1837,  say:  "The  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church 
in  the  United  States,  profess  to  adhere  to  the  Ausburg 
Confession.  The  General  Synod  has  adopted  it  as  a  doc- 
trinal standard  ;  although  it  does  not  require  the  ministers 
and  churches  in  its  connection,  to  believe  every  sentiment  it 
contains  on  those  unessential  points,  which  caused  so  much 
contention  when  it  was  first  adopted."  From  the  pledge 
which  the  Constitution  requires  as  licensure  find  ordination, 
(which  is  then  reported,)  "  It  will  appear,  that  we  are  not 
bound  to  receive  the  unessential  points  of  the  Confession. 
All  that  is  required  is,  an  acknowledgment,  that  on  essential 
points  of  doctrine,  it  agrees  with  the  word  of  God.  And 
this  we  do  believe.  ,We  hold,  that  the  fundamental  truths 
of  the  gospel,  and  the  essential  doctrines  of  salvation,  are 
correctly  set  forth  in  the  Ausburg  Confession  ;  and  in  this 
declaration  the  committee  know  that  they  agree  with  the  body 
of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  the  United  States." — p.  3,  4.1 


(1)  This  respected  brother  has  recently  puhlishccl  an  article  exhibiting 
the  advantages  of  having  a  creed,  in  opposition  to  some  few  persons  in  his 
18a 


210  KRAUTH,    KURTZ   AND    MILLER. 

5.  Rev.  Dr.  Krauth,  about  the  year  1 830,  when  residing 
in  Philadelphia,  prepared  for  a  new  edition  of  Buck's  The- 
ological Dictionary,  an  accurate  and  impartial,  though  very 
brief  sketch  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  the 
United  States,  in  which  he  gives  precisely  the  same  view  of 
our  church.  "  The  doctrines  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  (says  he)  are  substantially  those  of  the  Confession 
of  Ausburg.  The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  as  held  by  those 
who  differ  from  Arians  and  Socinians,  a  vicarious  atonement 
made  by  the  passion  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  deprav- 
ity of  human  nature,  the  necessity  of  conversion  produced 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  and  a  future 
state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  eternal  in  their  duration, 
may  be  specified  as  the  cardinal  doctrines  of  this  creed."  Here 
the  reader  will  perceive  the  same  general  view  of  our  doc- 
trinal position  ;  and  the  doctrine  of  the  bodily  presence  of 
the  Saviour  in  the  eucharist  is  very  properly  not  included 
among  the  articles  regarded  as  "cardinal"  or  fundamental. 
See  Luth.  Observer  for  1831,  p.  86. 

6.  Rev.  Dr.  B.  Kurtz,  when  entering  on  his  duties  as 
editor  of  the  Observer  in  1833,  in  his  introductory  expose 
of  his  principles,  after  affirming  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  to  be  the  church  of  his  choice,  adds  the  following 
views  of  his  duties  as  a  Lutheran  :  "  While,  therefore,  be 
{the  editor)  regards  the  sacred  Scriptures  without  note  or 
comment,  as  the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  morals,  he 
at  the  same  time  holds  the  prominent  doctrines  of  the  Refor- 
mation, as  substantially  set  forth  in  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
and  will  consider  himself  bound,  according  to  his  best  abili- 
ties, to  defend  and  promote  them."  See  Observer  for  August 
24,  1833. 

7.  Rev.  Dr.  S.  B.  Miller,  Professor  of  Theology  in  Hart- 
wick  Seminary,  New  York,  in  his  discourse  preached  before 
the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Ministerium  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  in  1831,  uses  the  following  language:  "No  one,  com- 
petent  to  judge,  will  deny,  that  it  (the  Augsburg  Confession) 
contains  the  two  following  propositions  :  That  no  one  who 
should  die  without  having  received  baptism,  can  be  saved ; 

vicinity,  who  oppose  any,  even  the  most  temperate  use  of  creeds.  That 
article,  taken  in  connection  with  his  opinions  here  expressed,  exhibit  the 
Dr.  as  an  enlightened  friend  of  a  creed  of  fundamentals,  which  is  the 
ground  of  the  General  Synod. 


TESTIMONY    OF    DR.    REYNOLDS.  211 

and  that  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  we  actuall)7,  not  symbolically, 
or  figuratively,  but  actually  receive  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ ;  the  same  body  that  was  slain,  the  same  blood  that 
was  shed  on  the  cross.  Xozo,  feiu  of  our  ministers,  and  few 
of  our  people,  I  am  bold  to  say,  in  this  country  at  least,  hold 
such  a  belief." — p.  8.  Here  again,  one  of  the  oldest  and 
most  respectable  ministers  of  our  church  testifies,  that  the 
great  mass  of  our  ministers  and  laymen,  have  abandoned 
several  prominent  doctrines  of  the  Augburg  Confession, 
one  of  which  was  formerly  ranked  among  the  distinguishing 
doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  A  very  few  of  our 
ministers  have  gone  so  far  as  to  advocate  the  propriety  of 
rejecting  all  human  creeds.  Among  these  is  our  esteemed 
friend,  Professor  H.  I.  Smith,  of  New  York,  then  of  Hart- 
wick  Seminary.  In  a  discourse,  delivered  before  the  JSynod 
of  New  York,  in  1834,  he  says :  "  The  authority  of  the  New 
Testament  is  sufficient  for  me,  without  requiring  the  sanction 
of  either  Lutheran  or  other  creeds,"  <fec,  &c.  Yet  this 
sentiment  has  never  obtained  much  currency  among  the 
ministers  of  the  General  Synod.1  They  at  once  fixed  on  the 
medium  position  as  desirable,  fundamental  agreement  with 
the  Augsburg  Confession,  with  liberty  of  difference  from  it 
in  non-fundamentals,  and  to  this  almost  the  whole  mass  of 
our  ministers  and  churches  are  wisely  determined  to  adhere. 
8.  Rev.  Dr.  Reynolds.  Our  last  individual  testimony  on 
the  general  aspect  of  our  subject  is  from  an  interesting  and 
excellent  letter  of  Dr.  Reynolds,  penned  ten  years  ago  for 
the  Lutheran  Observer,  when  he  forwarded  to  the  editor  his 
translation  of  the  letter  of  Dr.  Endress,  an  extract  from 
which  we  presented  on  a  previous  page.  We  take  pleasure 
in  addino-  that  Dr.  R.  now  agrees  with  us  in  re-gardino-  the 
Augsburg  Confession  as  a  necessary  symbol  of  our  church, 
and  we  trust  his  continued  reflections  on  the  subject  will 
also  lead  him  to  favor  such  a  liberal  use  of  it  as  Dr.  Endress 
recommends.     On  this  scriptural,  and  rational  and  primi- 

(1)  It  is  but  justice  to  Dr.  Smith,  to  state  that,  more  mature  reflection 
led  him  to  forsake  this  latitudinarian  ground,  and  to  place  a  high  value  on 
the  use  of  symbols.  It  is  true,  he  lias  now  gone  further  than  is  in  our 
judgment  consistent  with  true  christian  and  apostolic  liberty  of  conscience; 
yet  we  doubt  not  the  generous  impulses  of  his  heart,  and  the  further 
investigation  of  the  subject  will  lead  him  to  the  juste  milien,  to  the  liberal 
ground  of  the  inspired  ap  >stle,  "  A  brother  that  is  weak  iu  the  faith  receive 
thou;  but  not  to  doubtful  disputations." 


212  TESTIMONY    OF    DR.    REYNOLDS. 

lively  Lutheran  ground  our  entire  American  Lutheran  Church 
could  be  happily  united.  "The  formation  of  the  General 
Synod  (says  Dr.  R.)  marks  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  the 
American  Lutheran  Church,  for  it  was  there  she  first  fairly 
declared  her  distinctive  character.  Hitherto  she  had  been 
slowly  growing  up,  in  individual  congregations  and  in  sepa- 
rate synods,  in  accordance  with  her  original  genius  and  with 
the  free  spirit  of  the  institutions  of  that  country  to  which 
she  had  now,  for  more  than  half  a  century,  been  so  happily 
transplanted.  Now,  however,  she  came  together,  as  one 
body,  animated  by  one  spirit,  to  enter  upon  and  labor  in 
that  wide  sphere  allotted  to  her.  I  say  she  came  together, 
for  although  two  synods  still  stood  aloof,  the  great  mass  of 
the  church  in  America  was  there  united,  and  a  moral  union 
was  formed  even  with  those  fragments  which  could  not  at 
once  be  blended  into  one  harmonious  whole.  And  although 
two  synods  soon  after  withdrew,  in  obedience  to  the  blind 
impulse  of  a  powerful  element  admitted  into  the  new  system, 
but  not  then,  nor  even  now,  perfectly  assimilated  to  it,  or 
put  into  its  proper  relation  to  it;  I  mean  the  popular  prin- 
ciple, or  Congregationalism,  yet  these  two  bodies  continued 
in  heart  integral  parts  of  the  union,  as  was  shown  by  the 
speedy  return  of  the  one,  and  the  frequent  efforts  of  the  other 
to  do  the  same  thing.  But  when  in  their  separation  from 
the  General  Synod  the  great  mass  of  the  brethren  have 
still  co-operated  with  it  and  made  it  a  virtual  bond  of  union. 
Dr.  Endress*  letter  and  the  constitution  of  the  General 
Synod  tell  us  the  form  which  the  Lutheran  church  assumed 
at  this  important  period.  She  did  not  cut  herself  loose  from 
her  Germanic  stock  and  form — the  one  faith  of  the  church 
of  all  ages,  by  a  schismatical  separation  from  it  and  rejection 
of  its  doctrines.  Neither,  01  the  other  hand,  did  she 
slavishly  bind  herself  to  the  doctrines  and  discipline,  the 
liturgy  or  the  symbols  of  any  particular  branch  of  the 
church,  whether  national  or  provincial.  She  duly  appre- 
ciated the  freedom  which  she  had  attained  by  being  eman- 
cipated from  the  thraldom  of  the  state  by  which  even  the 
bold  spirit  of  Luther  himself,  much  more  that  of  his  suc- 
cessors, in  every  part  of  Europe,  had  been  fettered  and 
arrested  in  its  onward  career.  We  might  verify  this  in  every 
part  of  the  American  church  organization,  but  for  the  pres- 
ent we   confine  ourselves   to  her  action  in  regard  to  the 


TESTIMONY    OF    DR.    RSY.NOLBS.  213 

symbolical  hooks.  These  she  neither  rejected  nor  received  as 
an  absolute  rule  of  faith.  Hence  we  find  in  the  constitution 
of  the  General  Synod  no  action  whatever  in  regard  to  them, 
although  Art.  III.,  Seo.  3,  takes  it  for  granted  that  our  doc- 
trinal views  are  based  upon  them,  when  it  requires  synods 
uniting  with  it  to  "  hold  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the 
Bible  as  taught  by  our  church."  So  when  the  General  Synod 
afterward  drew  up  a  constitution  for  Synods,  it  merely 
required  ministers  to  declare  their  belief  that  "  the  funda- 
mental doctrines  of  the  Bible  were  set  forth  in  a  manner  sub- 
stantially correct  in  the  Augsburg  Confession.  Nor  did  the 
delegates  who  formed  the  General  Synod  misrepresent  their 
constituents.  On  the  contrary  these  were  then  and  still  con- 
tinue to  be  the  sentiments  of  the  Pennsylvania  and  New 
York  Synods,  which  then  embraced  the  great  mass  of  our 
ministers  and  churches.  The  Pennsylvania  Synod,  partic- 
ularly, never  required  subscription  or  assent  to  the  symbol* 
ical  books,  nor  was  the  least  disposition  manifested  by  it  to 
change  its  ground  when,  in  1841,  it  revised  its  Ministerial 
Ordnung.  But  what  is  still  more  remarkable  and  significant 
in  this  matter  is,  that  in  the  liturgy  drawn  up  by  a  joint 
committee  of  the  Pennsylvania,  New  York  and  Ohio  Synods 
and  adopted  by  those  bodies,  as  also  by  the  Synods  of  East 
and  West  Pennsylvania,  and  recommended  by  the  General 
Synod  to  all  the  Synods  in  its  connection,  there  is  no  refer- 
ence either  in  the  formula  for  licensure  or  in  that  for  ordination 
to  any  obligation  of  the  ministry  to  teacli  according  to  the  sym- 
bolical books. 

Has  the  American  church  then  ceased  to  be  Lutheran 
because  she  does  not  subscribe  to  the  Auo-sburo-  Confession 
and  other  symbolical  books?  God  forbid!  for  then  would 
she  have  denied  the  truth  that  Luther  revived  and  confessed, 
viz.,  the  Bible  as  the  only  infallible  exposition  of  God's  will 
and  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  the  sole  ground  of 
justification.  But  I  need  not  dwell  upon  this,  as  it  is  the 
object  of  Dr.  Undress*  letter  to  show  what  it  is  that  specifi- 
cally distinguishes  Lutherans  from  all  other  branches  of  the 
church.  No  one,  I  think,  can  doubt  that  he  has  clearly 
shown  that  the  symbolical  books  are  not  necessary  for  this 
end. 

There  is  one  idea  that  seems  to  have  been  before  Dr. 
JEndress'  mind,  which,  however,  he  has  not  brought  out  as 


214  REV.    SHOBER,    STORK    AND 

clearly  as  he  might  have  done,  and  no  doubt  would  have 
done,  had  any  one  impugned  his  views — I  mean  the  power 
of  the  church  in  all  ages  to  make  and  publish  her  own  con- 
fession of  faith.  Luther  and  his  compatriots  were  perfectly 
right  in  proclaiming  their,  faith  as  they  have  done  in  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  the  other  symbols.  It  is  a  noble 
testimony  which  they  bore  and  do  still  bear  to  the  truth. 
But  they  could  not — they  did  not  confess  for  us,  their  suc- 
cessors. It  is  true  there  is  a  communion  of  faith  among  the 
saints  of  all  ages,  but  that  does  not  consist  in  these  written 
creeds,  however  true  and  excellent  they  may  be.  It  is  a 
living  principle  which  may  exist  under  various  external  forms 
and  may  speak  itself  forth  in  very  different  language.  And 
there  is  likewise  a  historic  connection  between  the  church 
-of  all  ages,  and  in  reference  to  this  we  are  prepared  to  show 
that  the  American  is  a  true  daughter  of  the  German  church, 
as  reformed  by  Luther  himself." 


CHAPTER  VII. 

Specific  testimony  concerning  individual  Synods  and  Di- 
vines of  the  General  Synod,  showing  their  doctrinal 
position  to  be  that  of  agreement  with  the  augsburg 
Confession  in  fundamentals,  and  acknowledged  dissent 
ON  some  minor  points. 

We  promised  to  adduce  additional,  specific  testimony, 
in  regard  especially  to  the  Synod  of  North  Carolina  and 
Rev.  Messrs.  Stork,  Shober,  the  Messrs.  Sherers  and  J. 
Reck,  who  were  among  its  principal  members.  As  Mr. 
Shober  was  confessedly  prominent  in  desiring  some  recog- 
nition of  the  Augsburg  Confession  at  the  organization  of  the 
General  Synod,  it  has  been  erroneously  inferred,  that  at  least 
he  and  his  Synod,  received  that  symbol  without  restriction, 
and  desired  its  unrestricted  recognition  by  the  General  Synod. 
This  we  proved  to  be  all  fabulous  in  our  former  series  ;  yet 
as  it  is  an  important  point  in  the  argument,  we  add  other 
irresistible  proof.     So  far  from  yielding  implicit  assent  to  the 


NORTH  CAROLINA  SYNOD.  215 

Augsburg  Confession,  much  less  to  the  other  former  sym- 
bolical books  of  our  church  in  Germany,  Mr.  Shober  for 
years  carried  on  a  controversy  with  the  Henkelites,  who 
confessedly  received  every  thing  found  within  the  lids  of 
the  whole  Concordeinbuch.  In  1821,  the  very  year  of  the 
first  meeting  of  the  General  Synod,  Mr.  Shober  published  a 
work  against  David  Henkel,  who  was  the  leader  and  princi- 
pal writer  as  well  as  disputant  of  the  Tennessee  Conference, 
under  the  title  of  "  Review  of  a  pamphlet  published  by  Da- 
vid Henkel, "  &c,  containing  64  pages,  8vo,  from  which  we 
extract  the  following  passages,  showing  the  light  in  which 
Mr.  Shober,  Stork,  &c,  viewed  the  doctrines  of  the  ubi- 
quity of  Christ's  glorified  body,  taught  in  the  Form  of  Con- 
cord, and  the  doctrine  of  the  presence  and  reception  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  contained 
in  the  Auo-sburq;  Confession : 

1.  From  Mr.  Shober's  Review. 

P.  4.  Mr.  Shober  says:  "That  the  body  of  Christ  fills 
all  space,  none  but  idiots  can  believe." 

P.  28.  Mr.  S.  remarks :  "  If  every  body  who  partook  of 
the  elements,  partook  of  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  Saviour, 
all  those  would  remain  in  Christ  and  Christ  in  them." 
Again  :  "  If  this  mortal  body  partook  of  the  humanity  of 
Jesus,  (as  D.  Henkel  asserted,)  in  the  eucharist,  the  first 
enjoyment  would  make  that  body  incorruptible,  and  if  it  par- 
took of  the  glorified  humanity,  it  would  make  the  same  like 
his  glorified  body." 

P.  33.  Mr.  S.  observes  :  "  But  his  (D.  Henkel's)  attempts 
to  convince  the  reader,  that  the  humanity  of  Christ  is  en- 
joyed, (received  in  the  eucharist,)  are  so  far-fetched  that 
common  sense  cannot  comprehend  them,  and  they  are 
abhorrent  to  the  understanding." 

P.  34.  Mr.  S.  says :  "  Let  me  only  repeat  again  that  if  all 
who  partook  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  eat  and  drink  Jesus 
boflily,  they  cannot  see  corruption,  they  cannot  die." 

P.  38.  Here  Mr.  S.  charges  D.  Henkel  with  endeavoring 
"to  make  the  people  believe,  that  the  Rev.  Mr.  Stork  was 
heterodox,"  because  he  had  said  "that  one  hundred  bibles 
would  not  convince  him  that  the  humanity  of  Christ  was 
taken  into  the  Godhead,  and  that  therefore  Christ  obtained 
all  divine  perfection."     But  the  Rev.  Stork  informed  Mr. 


gig  REVS.    SHOBEK,    STORK    AND 

Shober,  tliat  the  conversation  referred  to  was  not  about  the 
humanity  of  Christ,  but  specifically  "about  the  omnipres- 
ence of  the  body  of  Christ/'  and  the  expression  occurred  in 
a  friendly  conversation,  for,  (says  Mr.  Stork,)  the  idea  was 
so  absurd  that  a  body  coidd  be  everywhere  present,  that  the 
expression,  though  unguarded,  was  hastily  made." 

P.  39.  Mr.  S.  remarks :  "  Such  is  your  crafty  way  to  make 
people  believe,  that  we,  (particularly  Mr.  Stork,)  do  not  teach 
right,  and  this  only  to  lead  them,  if  possible,  to  believe  that 
the  body  of  Christ  is  everywhere  in  immensity  of  space  at 
the  same  moment."  And  then  Mr.  S.  subjoins  the  remark 
in  refutation  of  HenkePs  view,  "  After  his  resurrection  Jesus 
was  not  at  the  grave,  at  Emmaus,  and  with  his  other  disci- 
ples at  the  same  moment."  From  these  extracts  we  think 
our  readers  will  find  no  difficulty  in  deciding  whether  Mr. 
Shober  could  have  desired  the  unrestricted  recognition  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  by  the  General  Synod,  or  not. 

But  we  proceed.  That  Mr.  Shober  and  his  Synod,  did  not 
adhere  implicitly  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  is  further 
evident  from  the  declaration  and  official  action  of, 

2.  The  Tennessee  Conference, 

Which  confessedly  did  so  adhere,  and  which  was  the 
only  ecclesiastical  body  in  America  at  that  time  which 
received  that  symbol  without  reserve.  Of  these  men,  Dr. 
Bachman,  in  his  Discourse  before  cited,  (p.  12,)  gives 
the  following  characteristic  :  "  Some  years  ago  several  in- 
dividuals residing  in  North  Carolina,  who  had  previous- 
ly been  members  of  our  church,  on  account  of  some 
dissatisfaction  separated  themselves  from  our  communion. 
They  chose  as  a  leader  an  individual  by  the  name  of  (David) 
Henkel,  (hence  they  are  called  Henkelites, )  a  weak  and  illite- 
rate man,  whose  ground  of  dissent,  as  far  as  can  be  gathered 
from  the  crude,  visionary  and  inflammatory  publications, 
which  have  from  time  appeared,  either  under  his  name  or 
that  of  his  sect,  was,  that  the  Evangelical  Church  had  de- 
parted from  the  true  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  which 
he  and  his  church  had  attempted  to  restore."  At  a  meeting 
of  this  Tennessee  Conference,  held  in  Augusta  county,  Va., 
in  1824,  a  proposition  was  made  to  appoint  a  committee  of 
conference,  to  meet  a  similar  committee  of  the  North  Caro- 
lina Synod,,  to  confer  on  the  doctrinal  differences  between 


NORTH    CAROLINA    SYNOD.  217 

the  two  bodies.  They  also  instructed  a  committee  "to 
place  the  doctrines  of  the  North  Carolina  Synod  in  one  col- 
umn, and  those  of  the  Tennessee  Conference  in  another, 
extracted  from  their  published  writings  of  both,  and  then  th# 
public  can  judge  which  of  the  two  teaches  according  to  the 
Augsburg  Confession" 

In  the  same  year,  (1824,)  David  Henkel  addressed  a  let- 
ter to  the  Synod  of  Maryland  and  Virginia,  in  which  he 
asserts,  "  The  doctrines  on  which  the  said  ministers  of 
North  Carolina  have  deviated  from  the  doctrines  of  tbe- 
Lutheran  church,  are  these:  They  teach,  1.  That  baptized 
or  not  baptized,  faith  saves  us.  2.  That  the  real  humanity 
of  Christ  is  not  omnipresent,  and  that  none  but  idiots  can 
believe  that  his  body  fills  all  space.  3.  Consequently  that 
the  real  body  and  blood  are  not  present,  administered  and 
received  in  the  Lord's  Supper."  See  p.  4  of  his  printed; 
memorial. 

The  same  is  evident  from  the  letter  of  D.  Henkel  and 
eighteen  of  his  adherents,  addressed  to  Rev.  Messrs.  Stork, 
Shober,  J.  and  D.  Sherer,1  charging  them  with  teaching 
doctrines  inconsistent  with  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and 
Luther's  Catechism,  "  and  inviting  them  to  a  public  disputa- 
tion at  the  time  and  place  of  their  next  synodical  meeting."" 
p.  2  of  said  letter. 

The  minutes  of  this  Conference  for  1827  furnish  abun- 
dance of  evidence  of  the  same  kind.  Page  33  :  "  The 
Tennessee  Synod  impeach  them,  (the  ministers  of  North 
Carolina  Synod,)  with  having  deviated  from  the  Lutheran, 
Confession  of  Faith,  and  propagating  doctrines  under  the 
covert  of  Lutheranism,  which  are  erroneous."  "  One  of 
the  charges  against  them  is  that  they  have  deviated  from  the 
Lutheran  doctrines."  p.  35.  Again:  "The  ministers  of  the 
North  Carolina  Synod  call  themselves  Lutherans  ;  but,  as 
we  believe,  that  they  propagate  doctrines  contrary  to  the- 
Augustan  Confession,  we  consider  it  necessary  to  require  of 
them  to  stand  an  examination.  It  is  necessary  to  correct  a 
wrong  opinion,  which  is  :  that  Lutheran  ministers  are  at 
liberty  to  deviate  from  the  Augustan  Confession  whereinso- 
ever they  conceive  it  to  be  erroneous.      Some  ministers,, 

(1)  It  is  proper  to  remark  that  the  Rev.  Mr.  Sherer  had  publicly  denied, 
this  charge,  aud  defined  his  position. 
19 


218  REVS.     SHAFFER    AJD     IE.S.S. 

(namely,  of  North  Carolina  Synod,)  have  declared  that  they 
did  not  care  what  the  Augustan  Confession  teaches,  that  they 
simply  taught  the  doctrines  of  the  Scriptures.  Further,  that 
Luther  was  only  a  man  and  liable  to  err." 

Finally,  that  the  North  Carolina  Synod  were  known  to 
teach  doctrines  on  minor  points  different  from  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  is  proved  by  the  fact,  that  when  a  Mr.  Seechrist 
left  the  North  Carolina  Synod,  and  applied  for  admission  in 
the  Tennessee  Conference,  they  examined  him,  and  made 
him  renounce  the  supposed  errors  of  the  Synod  of  North 
Carolina  and  avow  his  belief  in  baptismal  regeneration  and 
the  presence  and  reception  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in 
the  eucharist.     See  pages  8  and  9  of  their  Minutes  for  1823. 

3.  From  the  Testimony  of  Rev.  D.  F.  Sch^ffer,  D.  D. 

In  the  Lutheran  Intelligencer  for  1 827,  we  find  an  article 
from  the  pen  of  the  editor,  on  the  state  of  the  church  in 
North  Carolina.  On  p.  74  he  says:  "From  these,  (several 
recent  letters  from  North  Carolina,)  we  learn,  "that  those 
who  represented  themselves  as  Lutherans,  (the  Henkelites,) 
but  taught  doctrines  diametrically  opposite  to  those  which  the 
church  approves,  are  sinking  in  the  estimation  of  all  who  know 
by  experience  and  from  the  sacred  scriptures,  {our  only 
guide  in  matters  of  faith,)  that  to  be  born  again  and  made 
meet  unto  salvation,  is  more  than  to  be  baptized."  Nay,  oth- 
ers "  are  induced  to  inquire  into  those  matters,  and  acknowl- 
edge that  the  doctrines  taught  by  our  regularly  authorized 
ministers  are  scriptural,  and  that  those  who  have  arrogated 
to  themselves  the  authority  to  teach  without  submitting  to 
an  examination  or  ordination  by  one  or  other  Synod,  (allu- 
ding to  David  Henkel,)  have  departed  from  the  true  faith." 

4.  From  Rev.  Johx  Re  ex. 

In  a  report  of  a  committee  on  the  state  of  religion  in 
North  Carolina,  of  which  this  esteemed  brother  was  chair- 
man, he  remarks  :  "  The  doctrines  of  the  Bible,  as  published 
by  the  Great  Reformer  of  Saxony,  and  echoed  by  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  are  substantially  taught  by  us,  (that  is,  by 
the  North  Carolina  Synod.")  Having  thus  proved  that  the 
North  Carolina  Synod  did  not  receive  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession unrestrictedly,  from  the  testimony  of  their  enemies 
who  went  out  from  their  midst,  from  the  declarations  of  her 


GENERAL    SYNOD.  219 

prominent  ministers  themselves,  we  now  close  the  evidence 
in  regard  to  them  by  showing-  that  they  had  not  only  as 
individuals  exercised  the  right  of  differing  from  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  when  they  believed  it  to  differ  from  the 
word  of  God,  but  that  when  in  1832.  they  as  a  Synod 
collectively  and  officially  adopted  as 

5.  Their  Constitution, 

the  Constitution  for  Synods,  recommended  by  the  General 
Synod,  they  avowed  their  assent  to  the  Confession  in  the 
following  usual  and  qualified  terms:  "We  believe  thai  the 
scriptures  are  the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice, 
and  that  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  scriirtures  are 
taught  in  a  manner  substantially  correct  in  the  doctrinal 
articles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession"  See  their  Minutes  for 
1832,  German  copy,  p.  20. 

Our  own  Position  in  reference  to  Henkelism. 

As  this  has  sometimes  been  misunderstood,  and  may  be 
unknown  to  our  younger  brethren  generally,  it  may  here  not 
be  irrelevant  to  remark  that  nearly  one  half  of  this  Tennes- 
see Conference,  which  for  some  years  consisted  chiefly  of 
David  Henkel,  his  father,  and  several  of  his  brothers, 
resided  in  our  pastoral  district  in  Virginia  between  1 820  and 
1825,  and  during  the  whole  time  carried  on  the  same  war- 
fare against  us,  charging  us  with  upholding  the  General 
Synod  and  with  not  adhering  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession.  Hundreds  of  our  parishioners  yet  live  to 
testify  that  wre  never  pretended  to  deny  the  differences  be- 
tween us,  and  that  in  whatever  defence  we  felt  called  on  to 
make,  we  represented  their  peculiarities  either  as  misappre- 
hensions of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  or  especially  ihk. 
doctrine  of  the  bodily  presence  as  being  remnants  of  Ro- 
manism, retained  indeed  in  the  Confession,  but  universally 
rejected  by  our  church  in  the  present  age. 

Having  now  established  beyond  all  contradiction  the 
merely  fundamental  adhesion  of  the  North  Carolina  Synod 
to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  we  may  now  add  a  few  words 
concerning  several  other  Synods.  We  begin  with  the 
ancient 


220  SYNOD    OF    PENNSYLVANIA. 


Synod  of  Pennsylvania. 

Although  it  is  a  well  known  fact  that  this  respectable 
body  has  not,  for  about  half  a  century,  required  assent  to  any 
thing  more  than  the  Bible,  not  one  of  the  former  symbolical 
books  being  ever  named  at  licensure  or  ordination,  as  may 
be  seen  even  from  the  new  Liturgy :  and  although  her 
merely  fundamental  accordance  in  fact  with  the  Augsburg 
Confession  is  included  in  the  general  testimony  of  Drs. 
Hazelius,  Bachman,  Lochman,  Krauth,  Lintner,  &c,  pre- 
sented in  former  articles,  it  will  be  interesting  to  hear 
additional  evidence. 

1.  Rev.  Probst,  who  was  a  member  of  that  Synod  from 
1813  until  his  recent  death,  and  well  acquainted  with  the 
sentiments  of  his  brethren,  in  a  work  published  in  1826, 
for  the  express  purpose  of  promoting  a  formal  and  complete 
Union  of  the  German  Reformed  and  Lutheran  churches  in 
America,  entitled,  "Reunion  of  the  Lutherans  and  Re- 
formed," argues  throughout  on  the  supposition  that  there 
was  no  material  difference  of  doctrinal  views  between  them, 
the  Lutherans  having  relinquished  the  bodily  presence  and 
the  Reformed  unconditional  election.  Speaking  of  the  sup- 
posed obstacles  to  such  union,  he  remarks:  "The  doctrine 
of  unconditional  election  cannot  be  in  the  way.  This  doc- 
trine has  long  since  been  abandoned  ;  for  there  can  scarcely 
be  a  single  German  Reformed  preacher  found  who  regards 
it  as  his  duty  to  defend  this  doctrine.  Zwingli's  more  liberal, 
rational  and  scriptural  view  of  this  doctrine,  as  well  as  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  has  become  the  prevailing  one  among 
Lutherans  and  Reformed,  and  it  has  been  deemed  proper  to 
abandon  the  view  of  both  Luther  and  Calvin  on  the  subject 
of  both  these  doctrines."     p.  74. 

Again:  "The  whole  mass  of  the  old  Confessions  was 
occasioned  by  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  those  troublous 
times,  has  become  obsolete  by  the  lapse  of  ages,  and  is  yet 
valuable  only  as  matter  of  history.  Those  times  and  cir- 
cumstances have  passed  away,  and  our  situation  both  in 
regard  to  political  and  ecclesiastical  relations,  is  entirely 
changed.  We  are  therefore  not  bound  to  these  books,  but 
only  to  the  Bible.  For  what  do  the  unlearned  know  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  or  the  Form  of  Concord,  of  the  Synod 
of  Dort,"  &c.     p.  76. 


TESTIMONY    OF    DR.    LOCHMAK.  221 

Again:  "Both  churches  (the  Lutheran  and  Reformed) 
advocate  the  evangelical  liberty  of  judging  for  themselves, 
and  have  one  and  the  same  ground  of  their  faith,  the  Bible. 
Accordingly,  both  regard  the  Gospel  as  their  exclusive  rule 
of  faith  and  practice,  and  are  forever  opposed  to  all  violations 
of  the  liberty  of  conscience."     p.  76. 

Finally:  "All  enlightened  and  intelligent  preachers  of 
both  churches  agree,  that  there  is  much  in  the  former  sym- 
bolical books  (or  confessions  of  faith)  that  must  be  stricken 
out  as  antiquated  and  contrary  to  common  sense,  and  be 
made  conformable  with  the  Bible,  and  that  we  have  no  right 
to  pledge  ourselves  to  the  mere  human  opinions  of  Luther, 
or  Calvin,  or  Zwingli,  and  that  we  have  but  one  master, 
Christ.  Nor  is  any  evangelical  Christian  bound  to  the 
interpretations  which  Luther  or  Calvin,  or  any  other  person 
may  place  on  the  words  of  Christ;  but  each  one  has  the 
right  to  interpret  them  according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own 
conscience."  p.  80.  "Inasmuch  as  all  educated  ministers 
of  the  Lutheran  and  Reformed  churches  now  entertain  more 
reasonable  and  more  scriptural  views  on  those  doctrines 
which  were  formerly  the  subjects  of  controversy,  what 
necessity  is  there  of  a  continued  separation?"     p.  81. 

2.  Testimony  of  Dr.  Zochman,  confessedly  one  of  the 
most  active,  distinguished  and  pious  divines  of  our  church, 
in  the  preface  to  his  Catechism,  published  in  1822,  after 
stating  that  the  proper  name  of  our  church  is  Evangelical, 
and  not  Lutheran,  thus  defines 

The  leading  Principles  of  our  Church. 

1)  "That  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  not  human  authority ', 
are  the  only  source  whence  we  are  to  draw  our  religious 
sentiments,  whether  they  relate  to  faith  or  practice." 

2)  "That  Christians  are  accountable  to  God  alone  for 
their  religious  principles,"  and  therefore  no  man  should  be 
punished  by  civil  governments  for  his  opinion's  sake,  &c. 

3)  As  Christ  has  left  no  express  directions  for  church 
government,  <fcc,  therefore  every  society  may  follow  its  own 
judgment,  and  the  Lutheran  Church  in  different  countries 
has  adopted  different  forms  of  government,  &c.  But  not  a 
word  is  said  about  adherence  to  the  Augsburg  Confession  a$ 
belonging  to  the  principles  of  our  Church.     Moreover,  that 

19a 


222  PROPOSED    UNION    OF    LUTHERANS 

the  Dr.  himself,  in  common  with  the  majority  of  his  asso- 
ciates, did  not  believe  the  doctrine  of  the 

Presence    and    reception   of    the    body    and   blood   of 
Christ  in  the  Eucharist, 

is  evident  from  his  Catechism  on  that  subject,  p.  33,  where 
the  question,  "For  what  purpose  did  Christ  institute  this 
sacrament?"  is  answered  thus: 

"  Not  only  to  put  us  in  mind  of  his  great  love  for  sinners, 
but  also  to  offer  us  an  interest  in  his  sacrifice,  and  to  assure 
us  that  all  penitent  and  believing  souls  should  be  partakers 
of  it,  as  surely  as  they  partook  the  consecrated  bread  and 
wine.  Bread  and  wine  are  the  pledges  to  assure  us  of  our 
interest  in  the  sacrifice  of  Christ."  But  not  a  word  is  said 
about  the  Saviour's  body  and  blood  being-  present  or  received 
by  all  or  any  communicant ;  and  the  spiritual  benefit  affirmed 
is  confined  to  penitent  and  believing  souls.  And  in  his  work, 
entitled,  History,  Doctrine  and  Discipline  of  the  Lutheran 
Church,  published  in  1818,  p.  106,  he  explains  the  terms 
"  receiving  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,"  as  follows  :  "As 
sure  as  the  penitent  communicant  receives  the  bread  and 
wine,  so  surely  does  he  receive  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Lord  Jesus — or  in  other  words,  the  benefits  of  redemp- 
tion." 

That  the  Rev.  Dr.  Undress,  also  one  of  our  most  distin- 
guished divines,  entertained  the  same  views  on  this  subject 
was  well  known  during  his  lifetime,  and  is  evident  from  a 
note  to  his  articles  in  the  Lutheran  Intelligencer  for  1827, 
p.  255.  Unfortunately,  although  he  wrote  much  and  well, 
he  published  very  little.  Yet  on  the  subject  under  consid- 
eration, the  extract  from  his  letter  given  ab-ove  am^ng  the 
testimonies  on  the  general  state  of  our  American  church, 
affords  sufficient  proof;  for,  in  describing  our  church  in 
general,  he  of  course  describes  one  of  its  prominent  portions, 
the  synod  to  which  he  belonged. 

A  united  Lutheran  and  Reformed  Theological  Seminary. 

3.  In  accordance  with  these  views  the  synod  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, in  1819,  "appointed  the  Rev.  Drs.  Schmucker, 
Lochman,  Muhlenberg  and  Ernst,  as  a  committee  to  confer 
with  a  similar  committee  of  the  German  Reformed  Synod, 
and  devise  a  plan  for  a  united  Theological  Seminary  for  the 


AND    REFORMED.  223 

two  denominations."  If  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  had 
differed  materially  from  the  views  of  the  German  Reformed 
would  they  have  desired  to  unite  with  them  in  erecting  a 
joint  Seminary  ? 

An  entire  union  of  both  Churches  proposed. 

4.  In  1822,  at  the  meeting  in  Germantown,  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Synod  unanimously  adopted  the  following  resolution, 
on  motion  of  Drs.  Endress  and  Muhlenberg: 

"Resolved,  That  a  committee  be  appointed  by  this  Synod 
to  deliberate  in  the  fear  of  God  on  the  propriety  of  a  prop- 
osition for  a  general  union  of  our  Church  in  this  country 
with  the  Evangelical  Reformed  Church,  and  also  on  the 
possibility  and  most  suitable  method  of  carrying  this  reso- 
lution into  effect."     p.  16  of  their  Minutes  for  1822. 

Unanimous  Declaration  of  Pennsylvania  Synod. 

5.  When  the  Synod  of  Pennsylvania,  at  the  meeting  of 
1823,  at  Lebanon,  felt  it  a  duty  to  yield  to  the  popular 
clamor  excited  for  selfish  purposes  by  some  political  dema- 
gogues and  a  renegade  German  layman,  who,  it  is  believed, 
fled  from  justice  in  his  native  country,  and  here  published  a 
slanderous  book  against  the  synod,  and  hawked  it  about 
from  house  to  house,  that  body,  by  an  almost  unanimous 
vote,  adopted  the  following  declaration  of  sentiments  in  the 
preamble  to  their  resolutions  :  "We  beheld  large  and  beau- 
tiful congregations  of  brethren  (the  Reformed)  who  labor 
with  us  in  the  same  spirit  and  with  the  same  view  in  pro- 
claiming the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  and  discharging  the  duties 
of  the  office  of  reconciliation,  who  often  in  the  same  house 
labor,  teach  and  worship  the  same  Lord  in  the  same  manner 
and  for  the  same  purpose.  We  gave  utterance,  as  it  were, 
from  afar  to  the  wish,  dictated  by  love,  to  enter  into  a  closer 
union  with  these  our  German  Evangelical  Protestant  breth- 
ren, and  termed  it  a  union  of  the  German  Protestant  Churck. 
But  our  own  brethren  (members)  have  misapprehended  us," 
&c.  p.  15  of  their  minutes  for  1823.  .  If  then  the  members 
of  this  respectable  body  know  their  own  doctrinal  views, 
these  words  contain  a  declaration  that  they  agreed  substan- 
tially with  those  of  the  Reformed,  who  never  received  the 
peculiariues  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  such  as  the  pres- 
ence of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour  in  the  Eucharist, 


224  SYNOD    OF    NEW    YORK. 

&c,  and  thus  they  confirm  the  declaration  of  Rev.  Probst, 
that  the  members  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  generally  had 
rejected  this  doctrine. 

Synod  and  Ministerium  of  New  York. 

Of  this  respectable  body,  which  formerly  embraced  all 
the  Lutheran  ministers  in  that  state,  we  will  merely  present 
the  explicit  and  conclusive  testimony  of  one  of  its  oldest, 
most  learned  and  respectable  ministers,  contained  in  a  pri- 
vate communication  to  us:  "In  the  earlier  days  of  our 
Ministerium,  it  did  require  an  assent  to  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession ;  but  how  far  qualified,  or  whether  qualified  at  all, 
I  cannot  say.  Nor  do  I  know  whether  the  requirement 
was  uniformly  insisted  on.  That  it  was  not  contained  in 
the  first  constitution  of  that  Synod  /  am  confident,  and 
equally  so  that  a  majority  of  its  members  were  disinclined 
to  any  such  rule.  In  the  Constitution  afterwards  unani- 
mously adopted,  every  thing  of  this  sort  was  not  only  omit- 
ted, but  forbidden;  and  no  attempt  to  unsettle  the  long 
practice  of  our  Ministerium  in  this  respect  has  been  made, 
or  could  be  made  with  any  hope  of  success."  The  Synod 
of  New  York  has,  therefore,  certainly  long  since  rejected 
the  binding  authority  of  the  former  symbolical  books. 

The  Synods  of  West  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  and 
Virginia. 

In  regard  to  these  several  bodies,  it  is  a  well  known  and 
undisputed  fact,  that  neither  of  them  ever  required  any 
pledge  at  all,  except  to  the  word  of  God,  not  even  to  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  until  the  General  Synod  proposed 
the  acknowledgment  of  that  Confession  as  to  fundamentals. 
The  liberal,  yet  truly  scriptural  spirit  which  pervaded  both 
of  them,  is  echoed  by  th-e  President  of  the  latter  body  in 
his  address  to  a  number  of  candidates  for  ordination  in 
1828:  "Wherever  we  cast  our  eyes,  we  see  the  Christian 
community  actively  engaged.  The  Bible,  the  Bible  appears 
to  be  the  watchword,  and  the  dissemination  of  its  heaven- 
born  truths  the  motto  of  the  Protestant  world."  Urging 
them  particularly  to  take  heed  to  their  doctrines,  he  utters  the 
following  language:  "Let  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  therefore, 
be  the  fountain  whence  you  derive  all  your  religious  views, 
and  according  to  that  standard  test  and  decide  upon  every 


SYNOD  OF  WEST  PENNSYLVANIA.      225 

doctrine  of  religion  that  is  presented  to  you  for  acceptance. 
Then  we  are  sure  that  "Christ  and  him  crucitied,"  will  bv  the 
burden  of  your  ministerial  performances,  and  the  theme  of 
all  your  discourses,  and  that,  like  the  Apostle,  you  will  be 
"  determined  to  glory  only  in  the  cross  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."  But  not  a  word  is  said  about  any  human  creed. 
Lutheran  Intelligencer,  vol.  III.  p,  228.  Even  the  children 
of  ihe  church  are  taught  to  regard  the  mode  of  the  Saviour's 
presence  in  the  Eucharist  as  a  subject  which  should  be  left 
to  the  free  judgment  of  each  individual,  as  may  be  seen 
from  the  Catechism  of  Dr.  Morris,  published  in  1844,  and 
extensively  used  in  these  Synods,  as  well  as  in  the  church 
generally,  in  which  work,  also,  this  presence  is  pronounced 
to  be  a  spiritual  one.    pp.  100,  101. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Baugher,  in  his  excellent  report  on  the 
Doctrines  and  Usages  of  the  Synod  of  Maryland,  prepared 
by  order  of  said  body  about  the  }Tear  1840,  fully  confirms 
our  account  of  the  doctrinal  position  of  this  respectable 
body 

"On  Regeneration. — We  believe  that  the  Scriptures 
teach  that  regeneration  is  the  act  of  God,  the  Holy  Ghost, 
by  which,  through  the  truth,  the  sinner  is  persuaded  to 
abandon  his  sins  and  submit  to  God,  on  the  terms  made 
known  in  the  gospel.  This  change,  we  are  taught,  is  radi- 
cal, and  is  essential  to  present  peace  and  eternal  happiness. 
Consequently,  it  is  possible,  and  is  the  privilege  of  the  re- 
generated person  to  know  and  rejoice  in  the  change  pro- 
duced in  him." 

"  Of  the  Sacraments. — "We  believe  that  the  Scriptures 
teach,  that  there  are  but  two  sacraments,  viz. :  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper,  in  each  of  which,  truths  essential  to  sal- 
vation are  symbolically  represented.  We  do  not  believe 
that  they  exert  any  influence  'ex  opere  operato,'  but  only 
through  the  faith  of  the  believer.  Neither  do  the  scriptures 
warrant  the  belief,  that  Christ  is  present  in  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per in  any  other  than  a  spiritual  manner." 

"Of  the  Symbolical  Books. — Luther's  Larger  and 
Smaller  Catechisms,  the  Formula  Concordiae,  Augsburg 
Confession,  Apology,  and  Smalkald  Articles  are  called  in 
Germany  the  Symbolical  Books  of  the  church.  We  regard 
them  as  good  and  useful  exhibitions  of  truth,  but  do  not 


226  SYNOD    OF    MARYLAND. 

receive  them  as  binding  on  the  conscience,  except  so  far  as 
they  agree  with  the  word  of  God." 

It  will  be  seen,  that  the  position  of  that  body  on  the  sub- 
ject of  baptismal  regeneration,  the  real  or  bodily  presence, 
and  the  obligation  of  the  former  symbolical  books,  is  clearly 
expressed. 

We  have  thus  proved,  from  the  express  published  decla- 
rations of  some  half  dozen  of  our  most  respectable  divines, 
that  the  doctrinal  position  of  our  American  church  in  gen- 
eral, about  the  time  of  the  origin  of  the  General  Synod  and 
thereafter,   was   that  of  fundamental   agreement  with   the 

Auii'sburo-  Confession,  with  acknowledged  difference  in  mi- 
ss o  *  o 

nor  points.  We  have  proved  the  same  fact  concerning  the 
Synod  of  North  Carolina,  of  Pennsylvania,  of  West  Pennsyl- 
vania, of  Maryland  and  Virginia,  and  of  New  York  in  par- 
ticular ;  and  as  there  is  not  a  single  author  who,  within  this 
period,  has  published  any  thing  either  affirming  or  proving 
the  contrary,  we  should  suppose  this  point  must  be  regarded 
as  settled  in  all  time  to  come. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

The  General  Synod  herself. 

We  shall  now  proceed  to  show  that  the  same  doctrinal  po- 
sition was  also  assumed  and  perpetuated  to  this  time,  by  the 
General  Synod  herself.  That  these  were  the  doctrinal  views 
which  she  was  understood  to  profess  and  hold,  we  prove, 

a)  By  the  testimony  of  her  most  violent  opponents,  the 
members  of  the  Tennessee  Conference,  who  made  it  a  stand- 
ing objection  to  the  General  Synod,  that  she  was  not  Lu- 
theran, and  had  not  adopted  and  "did  not  adhere  to  the  Augs- 
burg Confession."  In  the  Minutes  of  said  Conference  for 
1822,  p.  8,  (of  German  copy)  we  find  the  substance  given 
of  a  letter  from  a  minister  of  their  own  body,  in  which  he 
affirms  "that  the  General  Synod  is  not  Lutheran,  but  much 
rather  the  contrary."     In  their  Minutes  of  1823,  p.  6,  they 


THE     GENERAL    SYNOD.  227 

publish  a  communication  from  one  of  their  churches  in  Vir- 
ginia, stating  that  they  will  accept  no  minister  connected 
with  the  General  Synod,  but  desire  to  have  one  belonging 
to  their  Conference,  "because  they  do  yet  adhere  to  the 
Augsburg  Confession"  On  p.  7  we  find  a  similar  letter 
from  a  church  formerly  belonging  to  the  pastoral  district  of 
which  I  had  charge  in  Virginia,  stating,  "that  as  they  had 
no  opportunity  to  obtain  the  services  of  any  minister,  except 
such  as  belong  to  the  General  Synod,  they  beg  to  be  sup- 
plied by  said  Conference,  as  it  yet  adheres  to  the  Augsburg 
Confession" 

At  a  meeting  of  a  Conference  held  in  Nelson  county,  Ky., 
and  consisting  chiefly  of  several  members  of  the  Tennessee 
Conference,  on  p.  5,  of  their  Minutes,  we  read:  "Every 
article  thereof  (of  the  General  Synod's  Constitution)  was 
minutely  examined;  whereupon  the  session  (Conference) 
unanimously  declared  the  Constitution  of  the  General  Synod 
to  be  contrary  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Augsburg 
Confession  of  faith,  and  subversive  to  (of)  Christian  lib- 
erty." Again,  on  p.  6  :  "It  was  unanimously  resolved, 
that  we  by  no  means  sanction  the  General  Synod,  as  we 
have  sufficient  reason  to  believe  that  the  Genercd  Synod 
have  departed  from  the  Lutheran  doctrine." 

2.  We  shall  prove  that  the  General  Synod  did  not  adhere 
to  all  the  tenets  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  from  her  own 
acts  and  declarations. 

a)  The  Augsburg  Confession  is  never  once  so  much  as 
named  in  the  Constitution  of  the  General  Synod,  and  yet  if 
the  members  framing  that  Constitution  had  designed  to  re- 
quire an  implicit  conformity  to  it,  would  they  not  at  least 
have  mentioned  that  Confession  in  some  way  ? 

5)  Luther's  Catechism  not   approved  as  symbolic  or 

PERFECT. 

In  1821,  the  very  first  General  Synod  ever  convened 
passed  the  following  resolution  : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  present  state  of  our  church  requiring 
it,  a  committee  be  appointed  to  compose  an  English  cate- 
chism, and  to  offer  it  for  the  consideration  of  the  next 
General  Synod/' 

The  Rev.  Drs.  Endress,  J.  G.  Schmucker,  Lochman,  and 
Messrs.  Shober  and  D.   F.  Schaeffer  were  appointed,  all  of 


223  THEOL.     SEM.     OF     GEN.     SYNOD. 

whom,  (confessedly  among  our  very  first  divines,)  regarded 
it  as  necessary  to  make  various  improvements  in  Luther's 
Catechism  to  adapt  it  to  what  was  "  required  by  the  present 
state  of  our  church"  or  to  compose  a  new  one.  One  of  their 
number,  Dr.  Lochman,  had  actually  made  preparations  for 
such  a  work,  which  he  published  on  his  own  responsibility 
the  succeeding  year,  1822,  before  the  meeting  of  the  next 
General  Synod.  In  1823'  this  committee  submitted  their 
report,  together  with  the  materials  for  a  new  catechism.  As 
these  materials  were  not  ready  for  the  press,  and  the  General 
Synod  wished  to  act  deliberately  in  this  matter,  the  materials 
were  committed  to  another  committee,  consisting  of  Rev. 
Messrs.  Shober,  D.  F.  Shaeffer,  Herbst,  and  ourself,  "to 
examine  and  report  thereon  with  additions."  This  commit- 
tee, principally  through  our  own  efforts,  resolved  to  retain 
Luther's  Catechism  for  the  present,  and  to  report  an  improved 
translation  of  the  questions,  What  is  your  state  by  nature? 
&c,  with  explanatory  additions  on  the  decalogue,  infant 
baptism  and  the  eucharisc,  which  were  furnished  by  ourself, 
were  adopted  by  the  next  General  Synod  and  published  by 
their  order.  See  Minutes  for  1821,  p.  5;  for  1823,  p.  5; 
and  for  1825,  p.  9.  Now  if  the  General  Synod  had  regarded 
Luther's  Catechism  as  symbolical,  or  had  desired  to  require 
every  minister  to  use  it  in  the  instruction  of  the  young, 
would  they  have  appointed  a  committee  to  supercede  it  by 
another? 

e)  But  the  General  Synod  did  explicitly  declare  her  rela- 
tion to  the  Augsburg  Confession  at  a  very  early  day.  At 
the  meeting  of  the  third  General  Synod  in  £825}  that  body 
feeling  the  necessity  and  duty  of  providing  their  numerous 
destitute  churches  with  competent  ministers  of  the  Gospel,, 
took  action  on  the  subject  of  establishing  a 

Theological  Seminary. 

And  here  certainly,  if  anywhere,  when  fixing  the  princi- 
ples on  which  the  institution  was  to  be  conducted,  and  deter- 
mining the  doctrines  which  should  be  taught  to  those  who 
were  to  minister  in  holy  things  in  time  to  come,  the  members 
of  the  General  Synod  would  certainly  feel  it  their  duty  to 
fix  the  doctrinal  standard  which  they  desired  to  have  incul- 
cated on  their  future  associates  and  their  successors  in  office. 
And  did  they  neglect  this  solemn  duty  ?     "No,  verily,  the 


THE    '-LUTHERANER"     REBUTTED.  229 

very  first  resolution  they  adopted  was  devoted  to  this  sacred 
obligation,  and  is  couched  in  the  following  words  : 

''Whereas,  the  General  Synod  regard  it  as  a  solemn  duty 
imposed  on  them  by  their  Constitution,  and  due  from  them 
to  their  God  and  to  the  Church,  to  provide  for  the  proper 
education  of  men  of  piety  and  talents  for  the  Gospel 
ministry  ;  therefore, 

"Resolved,  1.  That  the  General  Synod  will  forthwith 
commence,  in  the  name  of  the  Triune  God,  and  in  humble 
reliance  on  his  aid,  the  establishment  of  a  Theological  Sem- 
inary, which  shall  be  exclusively  devoted  to  the  glory  of 
our  Divine  Redeemer,  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  God  over  all 
blessed  forever.  And  that  in  this  Seminary  shall  be  taught, 
in  the  German  and  Eno-lish  lamma^es,  the  fundamental 
doctrines  of  the  sacred  scriptures  as  contained  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession." 

Here,  then,  the  question  is  settled  forever  as  to  what  was 
to  be  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the  Seminary.  The  Augsburg 
Confession  was  to  be  used  as  well  to  exclude  Socinians,  and 
other  fundamental  errorists,  as  out  of  respect  to  that  ancient 
symbol  of  our  church.  Yet  that  Confession  was  not  to  be 
implicitly  followed,  its  binding  authority  was  explicitly  limited 
to  fundamental  doctrines;  not  to  the  fundamental  doctrines  or 
features  of  ancient  Lutherantsm,  amongst  which  the  so-called 
old  Lutherans  of  the  present  day  would  class  some  of  Lu- 
ther's peculiarities,  such  as  the  doctrine  of  the  bodily  pres- 
ence, &e.,  but  its  binding  authority  extends  only  to  the 
fundamental  doctrines  of  Scrijjtures,  among  which  no  theo- 
logian of  any  standing  will  rank  the  peculiar  doctrines  of 
his  sect.  For  every  enlightened  divine  will  cordially  respond 
to  the  noble  sentiment  of  the  venerable  Dr.  Miller,  of 
Princeton,  but  recently  translated  to  abetter  world  :  "Though 
I  am  a  decided  Calvinist,  (says  the  Dr..)  yet  it  would  never 
occur  to  me  to  place  the  peculiarities  of  the  Calvinistic  creed 
among  the  fundamentals  of  our  common  Christianity. '* 
Thus  felt  and  thus  acted  the  members  of  our  General  Synod, 
and  we  rejoice  that  we  were  among  them. 

Personal  charge  of  the   "  Lutheraner,"  of  Missouri,, 
rebutted. 

Here  it  may  not  be  improper  to  add  a  few  words  touching 
the  course  of  "Der  Lutheraner,"  a  paper  representing  the- 


230       THE  "LUTHERANER"  REBUTTED. 

Old  Lutherans  of  the  West,  whose  editor  not  only  denounaes 
all  the  late  efforts  of  European  nations  to  cast  off  that  oppres- 
sion from  which  he  and  so  many  thousands  have  found  a 
happy  asylum  in  the  Western  world*  as  unjustifiable  rebel- 
lion, but  openly  advocates  the  duty  of  passive  obedience  to 
kings  amid  the  most  flagrant  oppression.  That  paper  is  but 
consistent  with  itself  when  advocating  similar  absolute  sub- 
mission to  creeds — lor  the  foundations  of  civil  and  religious 
liberty  are  the  same.  This-  paper  recently  published  an 
article  flatly  charging  uswith  perjury  and  dishonesty,  because 
we  professedly  reject  some  minor  tenets  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  to  which  the  article  affirms,  our  oath  as  Professoj 
in  the  Theological  Seminary  bound  us,  Now  this  oath  of 
office  is  similar  to  the  resolution  of  the  General  Synod 
above  quoted,  expressly  limiting  our  obligation  to  the  Augs- 
burg  Confession  "to  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Scripture" 
We  wrote  it  oursclf,  and  ought  to  understand  its  import. 
These .  men  are  ignorant  of  the  doctrinal  history  of  our 
American  church,  and  if  they  are  christians  ought  not  so 
precipitately  to  pass  judgment  on  what  they  but  imperfectly 
understand.  They  should  know  that  our  American  church, 
exercising  her  inherent  right  to  judge  and  act  for  herself, 
had,  a  quarter  of  a  century  before  the  origin  of  the  General 
Synod,  rejected  the  binding  authority  of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, and  of  all  other  human  creeds;  and  had  in  fact 
rejected  some  of  the  minor  tenets  of  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion :  that  the  founders  of  the  General  Synod  approving  the 
state  of  doctrine  existing  among  themselves,  did  not  once 
name  the  Augsburg  Confession  in  their  Constitution,  and 
whenever  in  subsequent  years  that  Confession  was  referred 
to  in  any  of  their  acts,  it  was  invariably  accompanied  with  a 
restriction  to  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  scripture.  On 
exactly  the  same  basis  the  Theological  Seminary  founded  by 
them  was  placed  ;  and  that  we  have  been  true  to  this  basis 
and  have  occupied  exactly  the  same  ground  in  our  theology 
ical  instructions  and  our  publications  is  admitted.  Our 
Popular  Theology,  containing  our  doctrinal  system,  was 
universally  received  as  a  fair  exhibition  of  the  prevailing 
doctrines  of  the  great  mass  of  our  American  churches. 
From  various  commendatory  articles  wo  cite  only  what 
refers  to  this  point.  In  the  Lutheran  Observer  for  July  1, 
1233,.  then   edited  by  him,    the   Rev.   Dr.   Morris,    whose 


TJ1E     POPULAR    THEOLOGY.  231 

extensive  acquaintance  with  tbe  church  cannot  be  doubted, 
says:  "  This  work  is  characterized  by  all  that  logical  preci- 
sion and  clearness  of  thought,  which  distinguish  the  writings 
of  that  gentleman,  and  it  will  really  be  a  valuable  addition 
to  the  literature  of  our  church.  We  take  pleasure  in  recom- 
mending it  to  all  who  desire  to  see  the  fundamental  doctrines 
of  the  church  plainly  stated  and  triumphantly  proved,"  <fcc. 
And  in  his  introduction  to  Dr.  Kurtz's  work,  entitled,  "  Why 
are  you  a  Lutheran?"  he  remarks:  "  Dr.  Schmucker's  val- 
uable Popular  Theology  has  contributed  much  to  remove 
wrong  impressions  from  the  minds  of  many  intelligent  read- 
ers." In  the  Observer  for  January  9,  1835,  a  highly  re- 
spectable writer  affirms:  "We  think  that  in  presenting 
this  work  to  the  public,  Dr.  S.  has  conferred  a  distinguished 
favor  upon  the  members  of  our  Church,  &c.  The  public 
has  already  judged  his  book.  The  highest  encomium,  we 
apprehend,  which  it  can  receive  has  been  bestowed  in  the 
eagerness  with  which  it  was  received,"  <fcc.  February 
6,  the  able  editor  of  the  Observer,  Dr.  Kurtz,  says:  "Re- 
garding as  we  do  the  Popular  Theology  not  only  as  an 
ably  written  work,  exhibiting  much  learning  and  a  vast 
amount  of  ;lucid  and  conclusive  argument  on  subjects  of 
paramount  interest  and  vital  importance,  but  oho  as  a 
correct  representation  of  the  doctrinal  and  ecclesiastical  views 
entertained  by  our  ministers  a?id  j^eople  generally,  we  are  hap- 
py," &c.  And  Dr.  Lintner  and  the  committee  of  Hartwkk 
Synod,  affirm  in  their  notes  on  the  Augsburg  Confession,  in 
1837:  "Dr.  S.'s  Popular  Theology  is  a  standard  work  in 
our  chttrck."  It  is  evident  then  that  we  agree  with  the  pre- 
vailing doctrinal  views  of  the  churches  of  the  General 
Synod,  which  are  those  of  fundamental  agreement  with  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  with  acknowledged  differences  on 
minor  points,  and  as  this  is  what  is  required  by  the  Profes- 
sor's oath  in  the  Seminary,  we  are  at  a  loss  to  see  any  ground 
for  the  charge  against  us  in  the  "  Lutheraner."  The  Pop- 
ular Theology  has  of  late  sometimes  been  censured  as  not 
giving  a  correct  view  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  sym- 
bols. Such  censure  is,  however,  both  unmanly  and  unchris- 
tian, not  to  say  unscientific.  We  nowhere  profess  to  present 
the  symbolic  theology  of  the  church  in  Europe.  On  the 
contrary,  our  preface  and  the  introductory  chapter  on  the 
history  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  the  qualified  man- 


232  THE  POPULAR  THEOLOGY. 

ner  in  which  it  is  received  in  this  country,  distinctly  state 
the  standpoint  which  we  occupy  ;  and  to  censure  a  work  for 
not  containing  what  it  does  not  profess  to  present,  is  unworthy 
of  a  respectable  critic,  or  an  honorable  man. 

d)  Pastoral  Addresses  of  the  General  Synod. 

Even  the  second  General  Synod  ever  convened,  (in  1823,) 
in  their  Pastoral  Address  to  the  churches,  distinguished  be- 
tween fundamental  and  non-fundamental  aberrations  or  de- 
viations from  the  scriptures  or  from  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
affirming  that  the  former  we  should  view  with  charity,  but 
fundamental  errorists  or  "heretics"  we  should  cast  out." 
p.  14.  But  in  the  address  of  the  General  Synod  of  1829, 
that  body  has  given  as  explicit  a  declaration  as  language 
can  convey,  which  must  forever  remove  all  doubt  as  to  the 
doctrinal  position  she  occupies : 

"Amid  these  circumstances  we  rejoice  anew  in  the  grand 
design  of  the  General  Synod  of  our  church.  This  design 
is  not  to  produce  an  absolute  uniformity  in  minor  joints  of 
doctrine,  for  we  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  this  existed 
even  in  the  primitive  church  ;  and  we  are  decidedly  of  opin- 
ion, that  whilst  the  grand  doctrines  of  the  Reformation  are 
absolutely  insisted  on,  every  minister  and  layman  should 
have  full  liberty  to  approach  the  study  of  his  Bible  untram- 
meled  by  the  shackles  of  human  creeds.  The  General 
Synod  therefore  only  requires  of  those  ivho  are  attached  to  her 
connexion,  that  they  hold  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the 
Gospel,  as  taught  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  in  all 
minor  points  leaves  them  unrestricted.  On  the  one  hand 
we  are  not  able  to  go  with  those  who  renounce  uncondition- 
ally all  creeds  and  confessions,  because,  we  cannot  see  how 
Socinians  could  be  effectually  excluded  from  the  church 
without  them.  But  we  feel  well  assured  that  the  great  ma- 
jority of  creeds  in  the  Christian  church,  by  entering  far  too 
much  into  minor  ramifications  of  doctrine,  and  attaching  too 
great  importance  to  subordinate  and  even  doubtful  points, 
have  cherished  in  the  most  direct  manner,  and  from  their 
very  nature  must  cherish  the  unhallowed  spirit  of  bigotry 
and  sectarianism.  It  cannot,  we  think,  be  doubted  by  any 
one  who  has  paid  attention  to  this  subject,  that  there  are  in 
each  of  the  several  orthodox  denominations,  and  often  in  the 
individual  congregation,  persons  differing  from  each  other  as 


PLEDGE    AT    LICENSURE.  233 

much  as  the  several  (denominational)  creeds  do.  Why 
then  should  not  all  the  Synods  which  bear  the  name  of  the 
immortal  Luther,  and  still  retain  the  cardinal  views  of  that 
illustrious  Reformer,  be  associated  together  by  the  very  slen- 
der bond  of  our  General  Synod,  though  they  may  not  agree  in 
some  points  not  touching  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession?'*     Minutes  for  1829,  pp.  15,  16. 

An  invitation  by  the  General  Synod  to  all  Lutheran  Synods 
holding  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Bible  as  taught  by 
our  church,  to  unite  with  them,  was  adopted  in  1835,  (see 
Min.,  pp.  23,  24,)  as  part  of  their  Constitution. 

Explicit  recommendation  of  the  General  Synod  to  bind 
only  to  the  fundamentals. 
In  the  Constitution  for  Synods  prepared  by  the  General 
Synod  and  recommended  to  all  District  Synods,  in  1829,  it 
is  directed  that  candidates  for  licensure  and  ordination  be 
pledged  absolutely  to  the  Bible,  but  only  to  the  fundamentals 
as  taught  in  the  Augsburg  Confession.     It  is  in  these  words  : 

1.  "Do  you  believe  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New- 
Testaments  to  be  the  word  of  God,  and  the  only  infallible 
rule  of  faith  and  practice  ? 

2.  Do  you  believe  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  word 
of  God  are  taught  in  a  manner  substantially  correct  in  the 
doctrinal  articles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession?"  See  Min- 
utes for  1829,  p.  38-9. 

In  addition  to  this  accumulated  mass  of  evidence,  and  to 
show  its  perfectly  conclusive  character,  we  confidently  affirm, 
that  for  a  quarter  of  a  century  after  the  foundation  of  the 
General  Synod,  no  writer  connected  vjith  that  Synod  has 
published  a  single  page  inconsistent  with  the  above  testimony, 
and  no  writer  out  of  the  General  Synod  has  represented  the 
prevailing  opinions  of  the  churches  and  ministers  of  the 
General  Synod,  to  be  different  from  what  the  above,  testimo- 
nies affirm. 


CHAPTER   IX. 

Features  of  the  American  Lutheran  Church. 

We  claim  that  the  American  Lutheran  Church  is  a  free, 
integral,  independent  part  of  the  church  of  Christ,  possessing 
20a 


234  FEATURES    OF    THE 

all  the  privileges  and  acting  under  all  the  obligations  per- 
taining to  any  other  branch  of  Christ's  kingdom,  and  there- 
fore possessing  the  full  right  to  settle  its  own  standards  of 
doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship.  On  the  proof  of  this 
almost  self-evident  principle,  we  deem  it  unnecessary  at 
present  to  enter.  And  why  should  there  not  be  an  Ameri- 
can Lutheran  church,  as  well  as  any  other  ?  There  is  a 
German,  a  Danish,  a  Swedish  Lutheran  church,  each  pos- 
sessing its  distinctive  peculiarities,  arising  from  their  differ- 
ent civil  governments,  and  the  difFerent  views  of  those  who 
founded  them,  to  say  nothing  of  the  differences  between  our 
church  in  the  several  kingdoms  and  principalities  of  Germany. 
Then  why  should  not  American  Lutherans  be  permitted  to 
organize  their  church,  in  accordance  with  the  principles  of 
their  own  glorious  civil  institutions,  in  conformity  to  the  dic- 
tates of  their  own  consciences  and  their  views  of  the  inspired 
word  of  God  ?  Are  they  less  able  to  search  the  Scriptures 
with  fidelity  and  success,  than  their  brethren  of  other  coun- 
tries? Are  we  less  competent  to  judge  of  what  suits  our 
peculiar  circumstances,  and  the  peculiar  age  of  the  world, 
and  the  signs  of  the  eventful  times  in  which  we  live  than 
others?  Are  we  less  able  than  others,  to  apply  the  great 
principle  of  Lutheranism,  that  the  Scriptures  are  the  only 
infallible  guide  and  rule  of  faith  and  practice,  that  noble 
principle  without  which  the  immortal  Reformer  could  never 
have  accomplished  the  great  work  of  Reformation,  and  to 
which  he  with  Melancthon  and  the  greater  part  of  their 
coadjutors  remained  faithful  to  the  end  of  his  life  ;  but  which 
many  of  his  less  noble  and  less  enlightened  followers  grad- 
ually abandoned  ?  It  is  a  well  known  fact,  that  by  continu- 
ing to  search  the  Scriptures.  Luther  continued  to  improve 
his  views  till  near  the  end  of  his  life.  Nor  were  the  opin- 
ions rejected  by  him  merely  the  corruptions  of  Romanism. 
During  a  large  part  of  his  life  he  was  a  rigid  Augustinian, 
or  as  we  would  now  term  it,  a  rigid  Calvlnist,  on  the  distin- 
guishing features  of  that  system  ;  although  Melancthon  had 
commenced  to  change  his  opinions  on  that  subject,  as  early 
as  the  publication  of  the  second  edition  of  his  Loci.  Having 
thus  felt  compelled,  by  the  light  of  God's  word,  to  continue 
changing  and  improving  his  views,  Luther  was  so  far  from 
wishing  his  attainments  to  be  regarded  as  the  ne  plus  ultra 
of  doctrinal  purity,  that  he  dissuades  men  from  reading  his 


AMERICAN     LUTHERAN     CHURCH.  235 

works,  and  urges  them  to  drink  from  the  infallible  fountain 
itself.  We  have,  therefore,  no  right  to  renounce  the  privi- 
leges, or  to  neglect  the  duty  of  adhering  to  his  principle, 
and  of  rejecting  those  of  his  opinions  which  we  find  contrary 
to  Scripture  as  well  as  also  of  conforming  our  government, 
discipline  and  worship  to  the  precepts  and  spirit  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  our  age  and 
country. 

And  are  not  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  our  situation, 
social,  geographical  and  political,  at  least  as  characteristic, 
striking  and  potential,  as  those  which  gave  diversity  to  the 
church  in  the  different  countries  of  Europe  ?  A  moment's 
glance  at  the  contrast  must  convince  every  unbiased  mind. 

In  Europe,  the  unhappy  union  of  church  and  state,  com- 
menced by  Constantine  in  the  fourth  century,  and  continued 
in  Europe  till  the  present  day,  has  hampered  the  energies 
and  corrupted  the  purity  of  the  church  :  this  country,  on 
the  other  hand,  is  the  chosen  theatre  of  God  for  the  free, 
unbiased  development  of  humanity,  and  the  settlement  of 
the  highest  questions  regarding  its  privileges,  capacities  and 
duties,  in  social,  political  and  religious  life.  There  the  civil 
government  restrains  the  activity  of  private  christians  within 
legalized  limits,  giving  a  crippled  form  and  an  enfeebled  aspect 
to  the  body  of  Christ :  here  the  laity  are  left  to  exert  their 
full  influence,  and  to  sustain  their  important  part  in  all  the 
enterprises  for  the  advancement  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom. 
There,  ministers  are  not  allowed  to  preach  oftener  than  their 
instructions  from  their  government  prescribe,  namely,  once 
a  Sabbath.  Preaching  at  night  or  in  the  week,  is  wholly 
unusual,  protracted  meetings  for  continued  preaching,  &c, 
are  utterly  unknown,  and  ministers  of  similar  views  and 
congenial  feelings  never,  so  far  as  we  could  learn,  exchange 
pulpits,  though  they  may  spend  a  lifetime  within  a  few  miles 
of  each  other !  Here  the  servant  of  Christ  can  preach  as 
often  as  his  strength  admits,  and  the  exigencies  of  his 
charge  seem  to  require  ;  when  requisite  he  can  invite  the 
aid  of  a  neighboring  brother,  and  can  reciprocate  the  favor 
by  occupying  his  pulpit  in  return.  There,  revivals  of  reli- 
gion and  special  efforts  to  obtain  them  of  God,  are  almost 
wholly  unknown  ;  here  these  gracious  showers  of  divine 
influence  are  constantly  refreshing  one  or  other  part  of  the 
vineyard  of  the  Lord,     There,  synodical  meetings  of  mwr 


236  FEATURES    OF    THE 

isters  and  lay  elders  as  representatives  of  the  churches,  to 
deliberate  on  the  interests  of  the  church,  and  enact  rules  for 
her  government,  are  unknown.  In  one  or  two  portions  of 
the  church  we  hear  of  occasional  synods ;  but  they  do  not 
consist  of  the  ministry  in  general,  but  only  of  select  digni- 
taries of  the  church ;  nor  of  any  laymen  elected  by  the 
churches,  but  only  of  a  few  political  officers  of  the  govern- 
ment !  Here,  the  ministers  and  lay  representatives  of  a 
given  district,  all  meet  on  terms  of  equality  to  deliberate 
and  devise  measures  for  the  advancement  of  the  kingdom 
of  Christ,  subject  to  no  other  rules  than  such  as  they  them- 
selves adopt.  There,  even  in  Wittenberg  itself,  in  the  ven- 
erable halls  once  electrified  by  the  fearless  eloquence  of 
Luther,  theological  students  are  not  now  permitted  to  inves- 
tigate and  discuss  untrammeled  the  various  questions  of 
human  duty  and  interest  in  the  light  of  Scripture,  history 
and  reason  ;  but  an  officer  of  government,  forsooth,  must 
be  present  at  their  debates,  noting  down  the  tenor  of  their 
discussions,  especially  if  they  bear  on  civil  governments,  or 
the  duties  or  conduct  of  civil  rulers  !  And  woe  to  the  pros- 
pects of  preferment  of  that  student,  who  should  be  found 
guilty  of  a  tendency  to  liberal  institutions.  Here,  theologi- 
cal students  are  -permitted  freely  to  discuss  any  question 
within  the  entire  range  of  human  interests  and  duties  in  the 
light  of  Scripture,  reason  and  history,  none  daring  to  molest 
them  or  make  them  afraid.  And  for  the  selection  of  their 
ministers,  our  congregations  need  not  apply  to  ungodly  poli- 
ticians ;  they  themselves  possess  the  power,  and  exercise  it 
according  to  their  own  judgment. 

In  presenting  these  statements,  we  wish  it  distinctly  un- 
derstood, that  we  do  not  charge  any  one  with  approving 
these  European  peculiarities,  which  we  condemn.  Nay,  we 
doubt  not  that  the  majority  of  our  European  brethren  (con- 
stituting, if  we  include  those  Synods  not  connected  with  the 
General  Synod,  about  the  half  of  our  ministry)  will  cor- 
dially unite  in  this  condemnation.  Those  belonging  to  the 
General  Synod  and  to  the  mother  Synod  of  Pennsylvania, 
will  all  do  so,  and  we  trust  also  the  major  part  of  the  others. 
But  Ave  present  these  views  to  prove,  that  if  ever  the  pecu- 
liarities of  any  Christians  called  for  an  original,  indepen- 
dent re-organization,  our  fathers  were  justly  summoned  to 
this  work,  which  they  aLo  nobly  accomplished.     Cast  by 


AMERICAN     LUTHERAN     CHURCH.  237 

the  hand  of  Providence  into  these  Western  wilds,  separated 
by  the  vast  Atlantic  from  the  mother  country,  they  felt  this 
to  be  a  peculiar  and  favorable  time  to  revert  to  the  first 
principles  of  the  apostles,  and  taking  lessons  from  the  civil 
bondage  of  the  church  for  more  than  a  thousand  years,  to 
return  to  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel,  and  adapt  their  or- 
ganization to  the  peculiar  situation  of  their  adopted  coun- 
try. This  organization  was  at  first  practically  begun,  and 
gradually  fixed  by  her  liturgies  and  Synodical  constitutions, 
and  finally  completed  by  the  establishment  and  action  of 
the  General  Synod. 

What  are  the  characteristics  of  the  American  Lutheran 
Church  ? 

I.  Feature  is  the  practical  rejection  of t/ie  binding  authority 
of  all  the  former  symbolical  books,  except  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession. 

As  practical  rejection  signifies  rejection  in  practice  ;  and 
as  those  who  do  not  in  practice  acknowledge  the  binding- 
authority  of  a  book,  do  necessarily  practically  reject  such 
authority ;  it  follows  that  as  our  fathers  during  the .  first 
quarter  of  this  century  acknowledged  the  binding  character 
of  no  human  symbol  at  all,  and  we  since  then  have  acknowl- 
edged none  except  the  Augsburg  Confession,  they  practi- 
cally did  reject  all  those  books,  and  we  reject  all  except  the 
Confession  of  Augsburg. 

II.  Feature  is  the  rejection  of  several  tenets  formerly  held 
ly  our  Church  in  Europe,  and  taught  in  some  of  her  former 
symbolical  books. 

a)  Exorcism,  which  is  taught  in  the  Taufbuchlein  (Tract 
on  Baptism)  of  Luther,  and  was  formerly  annexed  to  his 
Smaller  Catechism. 

Let  the  reader,  who  is  in  doubt,  examine  Luther's  Smaller 
Catechism,  in  the  edition  of  the  symbolical  books,  published 
by  Mr.  Ludwig,  of  New  York,  a  year  or  two  ago,  and  now 
patronized  by  the  old  Lutherans  of  the  West,  he  will  find 
this  Taufbuchlein  in  full,  containing  the  identical  directions 
for  Exorcism,  which  we  presented  in  the  first  chapter  of 
this  essay.  If  he  will  examine  that  very  extensively  circu- 
lated edition  of  the  Symbolical  Books,  edited  by  the  learned 
Dr.  Baumgarten,  of  Halle,  published  in  1747,  he  will  find 
the  very  same  directions  on  p.  467 ;  and  also  in  the 
Leipsic  edition  of  1790,  p.  610.     If  he  will  examine  the 


238  FEATURES     OF    THE 

very  first  edition  of  the  Concord ienbuch,  or  Authentic  Col- 
lection of  the  Symbolic  Books  ever  published,  printed  at 
Dresden,  in  1530,  he  will  rind  it  there,  on  p.  170-173. 
And  that  Luther  is  its  author,  is  not  denied  by  any  one  who 
has  examined  the  subject.  He  first  translated  it  from  a 
previously  existing  Romish  Latin  directory  in  1523,  (Funk's 
Kirchenordnungen,  p.  124.)  In  this  form  it  is  found  in  the 
Jen.  ed.  of  his"  work,  vol.  II.,  p.  248-252.  In  1524  or 
1526,  he  re-wrote  it  in  the  form  in  which  it  was  added  to 
the  Catechism  edited  by  himself  in  1529,  (Muller  Symbolic 
books,  p.  88,  89  of  Introduction,)  and  is  found  in  the  Al- 
tenb.  ed.  of  his  works,  Fom.  II.,  fol.  327.  See  Kollner,  vol. 
I.,  p.  501,  502,  and  Baumgarten's  Introduction  to  the  Sym- 
bolic books,  p.  166. 

If  then  a  book  derives  its  symbolic  authority,  in  any  de- 
gree, from  the  fact  that  Luther  wrote  it,  this  was  symboli- 
cal ;  or  if,  as  may  more  properly  be  contended,  it  derives 
this  character  by  being  received  into  the  authentic  edition 
of  the  Concordienbuch,  or  official  Collection  of  Symbolical 
books,  then  also  must  this  character  be  conceded  to  it.  But 
directions  for  exorcism  were  also  inserted  into  some  of  the 
Kirchenordnungen  or  directories  for  worship  in  the  differ- 
ent provinces  of  Germany.  Luther  and  Melancthon  always 
retained  exorcism,  as  did  a  large  portion  of  the  Lutheran 
Church  in  Germany,  and  the  entire  Church  in  Sweden.  Yea, 
during  the  17th  century,  a  rigid  adherence  to  this  supersti- 
tious rite  was  regarded  in  many  portions  of  the  Church,  as 
a  special  mark  of  fidelity  to  Lutheranism  ;  whilst  its  rejec- 
tion was  denounced  as  a  symptom  of  Crypto- Calvinism. 
But  it  was  more  generally  regarded  as  a  symbolic  inculca- 
tion of  natural  depravity  of  the  subjects  of  baptism.  Yet 
it  is  true,  and  we  rejoice  that  it  is  so,  that  a  large  part  of 
the  Lutheran  Church  was  at  an  early  day  ashamed  of  this 
remnant  of  papal  superstition,  and  rejected  it.  Especially 
in  the  Latin  copies  destined  for  the  learned,  it  was  most 
generally  omitted.  It  was  excluded  from  the  second  edition 
of  the  Concordienbuch,  also  printed  in  1580,  out  of  regard 
to  the  Churches  of  the  Electoral  Palitinate,  which  had  re- 
jected the  practice ;  and  a  recent  writer,  Muller,  has  as- 
serted that  it  was  not  received  among  the  Symbolical  Books 
at  the  beginning,  which  is  evidently  a  mistake.  It  was  re- 
ceived into  the  very  first  edition,  but  omitted  from  the  sec- 


AMERICAN     LUTHERAN     CHURCH.  239 

ond,  as  above  stated,  on  the  authority  of  Baumgarten  and 
Kollner.  And  even  previously  to  that,  it  had  been  received 
into  the  Corpus  doctrince  Thuring,  or  Collection  of  Confes- 
sions, &c,  and  into  that  of  Brandenburg  and  others.  In 
Saxony  exorcism  was  relinquished  in  1591,  but  again  re- 
stored a  few  years  after,  and  retained  until  the  last  century, 
when  it  was  made  optional  with  the  parents,  and  in  some 
cases  was  actually  practised  as  late  as  1836.  In  Hamburg 
the  practice  was  retained  till  1786,  and  in  Sweden  until 
1811!!  Siegel's  Handbuch,  vol.  II.  p.  67.  This  may  suf- 
fice to  show,  that  this  book  which  inculcates  exorcism,  was 
not  only  written  and  sanctioned  by  Luther  himself,  but  ac- 
tually received  into  several  collections  of  Creeds  and  Con- 
fessions, before  the  Concordienbuch  existed,  and  when  that 
was  formed,  was  also  received  into  it;  although  the  good 
sense  of  a  large  portion  of  the  Church  at  all  times  raised  a 
strong  party  opposed  to  it,  and  led  to  the  publication  of  dif- 
ferent editions  of  the  Symbolical  Books,  from  which  it  was 
excluded.  Still,  it  did  originally  belong  to  the  Symbolical 
Books,  as  it  is  still  found  in  some  of  the  latest  editions,  and 
we  are,  therefore,  perfectly  right  in  quoting  exorcism  as 
one  of  the  former  and  now  obsolete  doctrines  of  the  Lu- 
theran Church. 

b)  The  next  error  rejected  by  us  is  Private  confession  and 
absolution.  The  necessity  of  enumerating  all  our  particular 
sins  to  the  priest  at  Confession,  termed  Auricular  Confession, 
Luther  and  his  adherents  rejected,  but  Private  Confession, 
at  which  the  individual  confessed  his  sinfulness  and  pen- 
itence in  general,  together  with  absolution,  was  retained  in 
the  Lutheran  church.  "In  regard  to  confession,  (says  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  Art.  XL)  they  (the  churches)  teach, 
that  private  absolution  ought  to  be  retained  in  the  churches  ; 
but  that  an  enumeration  of  all  cur  transgressions  is  not 
requisite  in  confession.  See  the  elucidations  on  the  subject 
in  Popular  Theology,  p  308-310,  5th  ed.  In  Art.  XXV,  of 
Augsburg  Confession,  the  Reformers  say :  "Confession  is 
not  abolished,  but  that  according  to  custom,  no  one  is  admitted 
to  the  supper  without  having  previously  confessed  and  received 
absolution."  p.  74-75,  of  Baumgarten's  Concordienbuch. 
"  The  words  of  absolution  are  to  be  regarded  as  the  very 
words  of  God,  ctr.  We  are  to  believe  the  priest's  absolu- 
tion  as  certainly   as    if  ice  heard  the  voice  from   hcavciw* 


240  FEATURES     OF    THE 

p.  75.  "Confession  is  not  commanded  in  Scriptures;  yet  it 
is  to  be  retained  on  account  of  the  absolution,  which  is  the 
principal  thing  in  it,"  &c,  p.  77. 

Art.  XXVIII,  of  Augsburg  Confession,  says:  "Ministers 
possess  the ~>  power  to  forgive  andto  retain  sins.''''  p.  Ill,  ofBaum- 
garten.  "That  everlasting  righteousness,  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  eternal  life  cannot  be  obtained,  except  through  the 
office  of  preaching  and  the  reception  of  the  sacraments." 
p.  110.  "Absolution  was  received  privately  by  each  one  in- 
dividually, kneeling  before  the  confessional,  the  confessor 
imposing  his  hands  at  the  time."  See  Funk's  Kirchenord- 
nung,  &c,  p.  189-190.  "Private  Confession  was  to  be 
given  only  in  the  church,  in  which  the  confessional  was  so 
located  near  the  pulpit,  that  no  other  person  could  be  near, 
or  hear  what  ivas  said,  by  the  penitent."     Idem.  p.  190. 

That  this  practice  is  almost  universally  rejected  in  Ger- 
many, except  by  the  few  old  Lutherans,  is  certain,  and  in 
this  country  universally,  except  by  the  old  Lutherans  of  the 
West.  As  this  will  not  be  denied,  it  is  unnecessary  to  pre- 
sent proof  that  private  confession  is  not  practiced  in  the 
American  Lutheran  Church. 

c)  The  doctrine  that  the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are 
received  with  the  bread  and  wine  by  the  mouth  of  every  com- 
municant. In  reference  to  this  doctrine,  the  following, 
amongst  many  other  specifications,  are  made  in  the  dif- 
ferent symbolical  books,  to  which  we  refer  as  found  in 
Muller's  edition.  1)  "The  words  of  the  institution,  'this 
is  my  body,'  &c,  are  to  be  understood  literally,  (wie  sie  nacb 
dem"  Buchstaben  lauten,)  p.  539-647.  2)  That  both  the 
worthy  and  unworthy  communicants  receive  the  true  body 
and  blood  of  Christ,  (und  werde  nicht  alien  gereicht  und  emp- 
Langen  von  frommen,  sondern  auch  von  bosen  christen,)  p. 
320,  540,  649,  660,  650.  3)  That  it  is  the  omnipotence 
of  Christ,  which  causes  the  presence  of  his  body  and  blood 
in  the  eucharist,  (und  allein  der  allmachtigen  Kraft  unseres 
Herrn  Jesu  Christe  zugeschrieben  werden  soil.")  4)  That 
we  receive  the  real  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  Apol.  to  Con- 
fession, Art.  X.  "  The  tenth  article  (of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession) our  opponents,  the  Papists,  do  not  object  to,  in 
which  we  confess,  that  our  Lord's  body  and  blood  are  truly 
present  in  the  eucharist,  and  are  offered  and  received  with 
the  visible   articles,  bread  and  wine,  as  has  heretofore  been 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN    CHURCH.  241 

lelieved  in  the  (Romish)  church.1"  p.  164.  They  believed 
as  fully  as  did  the  Romanists,  in  receiving  the  real  body  and 
blood  of  Christ ;  only  they  denied  that  the  bread  and  wine 
were  changed  into  such  body  and  blood.  5)  That  we  receive 
the  body  of  Christ,  not  only  spiritually  but  orally,  p.  647- 
653.  6)  That  when  Luther  speaks  of  receiving  the  body 
of  Christ  "spiritually,"  he  does  not  use  the  term  in  the 
sense  of  the  Sacramentarians  (or  Zwinglians.)     p.  668. 

On  the  subject  of  this  doctrine,  Melancthon  himself  sub- 
sequently changed  his  views,  and  in  a  former  chapter  we 
proved  by  the  testimony  of  Prof.  Guericke,  that  before  1817 
the  great  mass  of  Lutheran  divines  had  relinquished  this 
doctrine  ;  as  also  by  other  testimony,  that  it  had  been  gen- 
erally abandoned  in  our  church  in  this  country.  Our  own 
father  is  regarded  as  among  the  few  who  yet  retain  some- 
thing of  this  view,  yet  he  disclaims  the  belief  of  the  real 
presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  altogether,  and 
believes  only  in  a  special  spiritual  presence  and  influence ; 
and  greatly  deplores  the  movements  of  those  who  desire  to 
make  binding  the  old  Lutheran  view  of  this  or  any  other 
non-fundamental  doctrine,  and  thus  to  disturb  the  doctrinal 
basis  of  the  General  Synod,  namely,  fundamental  adherence 
to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  with  acknowledged  liberty  of 
difference  on  minor  points. 

d)  Baptismal  regeneration,  or  the  opinion  that  baptism  is 
necessarily  accompanied  by  spiritual  regeneration,  and  the 
unconditional  necessity  of  baptism  to  salvation,  are  views  of 
baptism,  which  are  taught  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  Art. 
II,  IX.  "  This  natural  depravity  is  really  sin,  and  still  con- 
demns and  causes  eternal  death  to  those  who  are  not  regen- 
erated by  baptism  and  the  Holy  Spirit."  But  they  are  not 
entertained  in  this  country,  as  we  proved  by  the  testimony  of 
Dr.  Miller,  of  Hartwick,  p.  9,  of  his  discourse  on  the  Re- 
formation, of  Dr.  Lintner,  in  his  notes  on  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, p.  15,  and  of  Dr.  Bachman,  in  his  sermon  on  the 
doctrines  and  discipline  of  the  Lutheran  church,  p.  15,  &c. 

e)  The  mass,  that  is,  the  name  and  some  of  the  ceremonies 
of  the  Romish  mass,  were  retained  in  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion ;  although  the  errors  in  doctrine,  by  which  the  Romish 
mass  grew  out  of  the  scripture  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per, were  rejected  in  that  as  well  as  subsequent  symbols. 
"  Our  churches  (says  the  Augsburg  Confession,  Art.  XXIV.) 

21 


242  FEATURES     OF    THE 

are  unjustly  charged  with  having  rejected  the  mass,  (man 
legt  den  Unsern  mit  Unrecht  auf,  dasz  sie  die  messe  sollen 
abgethan  haben.)  For  it  is  publicly  known,  that  the  mass 
is  celebrated  amongst  us  with  greater  devotion  and  earnest- 
ness than  among  our  opponents."  **  Nor  has  there  been 
any  perceptible  change  made  in  the  public  ceremonies  of  the 
mass,  except  that  at  several  places,  German  hymns  are  sung 
along  with  the  Latin  ones."  "  Our  custom  is  on  holy  days 
(and  at  other  times  also  if  there  be  communicants)  to  say  a 
mass,  and  those  who  desire  it,  receive  the  Lord's  Supper." 
Subsequently,  however,  greatchanges  were  made  in  the  pub- 
lic ceremonies  attendant  on  the  Lord's  Supper  ;  and  Luther, 
in  his  Smalkald  Articles,  rejects  the  mass  entirely,  both  the 
name  and  accompanying  ceremonies.  And  soon  after  the 
whole  Lutheran  church  followed  him.  Still,  if  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  were  strictly  binding  on  us,  we  should  be 
under  the  necessity  of  adopting  on  sacramental  occasions  all 
the  public  ceremonies  then  and  now  usual  in  the  Romish 
church  in  celebrating  public  mass  ! 

f)  The  imputation  to  us  as  personal  and  damning  guilt  of 
that  natural  depravity,  which  has  come  upon  us  in  consequence 
of  Adam's  transgression.  Luther  and  Melancthon  both  taught 
the  immediate  imputation  of  Adam's  transgression  to  his 
descendants,  and  the  language  of  Luther  in  his  Smalkald 
Articles  (Art.  I.)  falls  very  little  if  any  thing  short  of  it- 
He  says:  "We  must  here  confess,  as  St.  Paul  says,  Rom. 
v:  12,  That  sin  is  derived  from  one  man,  Adam,  through 
whose  disobedience  all  men  became  sinners,  and  were  subjected 
to  death  and  the  devil.'"  Still,  the  Augsburg  Confession  only 
represents  our  natural  depravity  as  the  cause  of  our  con- 
demnation. That  this  doctrine  has  been  rejected  we  proved 
in  parts  of  this  work. 

We  might  add  to  this  list  a  number  of  other  topics  taught 
by  the  symbolic  books,  and  such  as  Luther's  peculiar  views 
on  the  mode  of  baptism,  in  his  Larger  Catechism,  which 
were  never  generally  adopted  in  the  Lutheran  church,  even 
in  Germany  ;  the  omnipresence  of  the  human  body  of  Christ, 
the  omniscience  of  his  human  nature,  and  in  general  the 
actual  reciprocal  transfer  of  the  attributes  of  his  human  and 
divine  natures  to  each  other  ;  that  the  virgin  Mary  conceived 
and  brought  forth  not  a  mere  human  being,  but  the  veritable 
Son  of  God,  and  therefore  actually  is  and  may  properly  be 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN     CHURCH.  243 

called  the  mother  of  God ;  the  sin-forgiving  power  of  the 
ministers,  (Art.  XXVIII.  of  Augsburg  Confession  ;)  the  lax 
notions  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  concerning  the  Christian 
Sabbath,  <foc,  &c;  but  their  discussion  is  unnecessary. 

III.  Feature  is  the  reception  of  the  Bible,  as  the  only  infal- 
lible rule  of  faith  and  practice,  and  the  acknowledgment  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  as  the  recognized  expression  only  of  the 
cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Bible.  This  is  fully  established  by 
the  action  of  the  General  Synod,  m  adopting  the  Constitu- 
tion for  District  Synods,  in  which  this  form  of  obligation  is 
explicitly  adopted  for  licensure  and  ordination. 

IV.  Feature,  Luther's  Smaller  Catechism,  (except  the 
questions  on  exorcism,)  not  as  a  symbolical  book,  but  as  the 
authorised  book  for  the  catechetical  instruction  of  the  young, 
yet  without  any  prohibition  of  other  similar  works.  This 
feature  is  proved  by  the  action  of  the  General  Synod  in 
directing  its  publication. 

V.  Feature,  the  Formida  for  Government  and  Discipline, 
also  proved  by  the  action  of  the  General  Synod  in  preparing 
and  publishing  it. 

VI.  Feature,  A  Hymn  Booh — proved  in  like  manner. 

VII.  Feature,  A  Liturgy,  both  German  and  English,  ditto  ; 
the  use  of  which  is  optional. 

VIII.  Feature,  Catechetical  Lnstruction  of  the  Young;  proved 
by  her  providing  the  Catechism  for  this  express  purpose,  by 
the  specific  injunction  of  this  duty  in  chapter  III,  sec.  6 ; 
IV,  sec.  5,  and  sec.  10.  *'  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  church 
council  to  watch  over  the  religious  education  of  the  children 
of  the  church,  and  to  see  that  they  be  occasionally  collected 
for  the  purpose  of  being  taught  the  Catechism  of  the  church, 
and  instructed  in  the  duties  and  principles  of  the  Christian 
Religion." 

IX.  Feature,  The 'admission  of  those  who  had  been baptized 
in  infancy,  to  sacramental  communion,  by  confirmation.  Chap. 
IV,  sec.  5,  of  Formula. 

X.  Feature,  Holding  of  prayer  meetings  and  family  worship. 
Formula,  Chapter  VII,  sec.  1.  "  Therefore  it  is  earnestly 
recommended  to  the  different  churches  in  our  connexion,  to 
establish  and  promote  them  (prayer  meetings)  among  our 
members, — their  object  is  the  spiritual  edification  of  the 
persons  present ;  but  the  utmost  precaution  must  ever  be 
observed,  that  God,  who  is  a  Spirit,  be  worshipped  in  spirit 


244  FEATURES    OF    THE 

and  in  truth — that  these  meetings  be  characterized  by  that 
solemnity  and  decorum,  which  ought  ever  to  attend  divine 
worship  ;  that  no  disorder  be  tolerated  or  any  thing  that  is 
calculated  to  interrupt  the  devotions  of  those  who  are  con- 
vened, or  to  prevent  their  giving  the  fullest  attention  to  him 
who  is  engaged  in  leading  the  meeting  ;  in  short,  that  accord- 
ing to  the  injunction  of  the  Apostle,  all  things  be  done 
decently  and  in  order." 

"It  is  solemnly  recommended  to  all  church  members,  and 
more  especially  to  the  members  of  the  council,  to  make  daily 
worship  in  their  family  a  sacred  duty." 

XL  Feature  is  Special  Conferences,  each  containing  from 
five  to  ten  ministers,  ordinarily  to  continue  two  days,  and 
"  the  chief  business  to  be  performed  at  them  is,  to  awaken 
and  convert  sinners,  and  to  edify  believers  by  close,  practical 
preaching  of  the  gospel."     Formula,  chap,  xvi,  §  1,  2,  3. 

XIII.  The  promotion  of  a.  spirit  of  liberality  and  Christian- 
union  on  scriptural  principles,  among  the  different  portions  of 
our  own  church,  and  among  evangelical  Christian  denomina- 
tions in  general.  Formula,  chap,  xxi,  Constitution  of  Gen- 
eral Synod,  Art.  iii,  §  8.  A  system  of  Christian  union,  not 
proposing  to  amalgamate  the  different  denominations  of 
Christians,  but  to  establish  more  fraternal  relations  between 
them  by  correspondence  and  occasional  delegates,  was  adop- 
ted and  recommended  by  the  General  Synod,  and  we  trust 
will  be  adhered  to. 

Having  now  clearly  established,  if  we  mistake  not,  the 
several  positions  propounded  in  the  beginning  of  this  essay, 
and  especially  that  the  great  mass  of  our  churches  had  at 
the  origin  of  the  General  Synod,  rejected  all  those  tenets  of 
the  former  symbolical  books,  which  they  now  reject,  and  that 
the  General  Synod  established  as  her  doctrinal  basis  funda- 
mental agreement  with  the  Augsburg  Confession,  with  ac- 
knowledged liberty  of  difference  on  minor  points;  we  close 
this  essay  with  the  earnest  hope,  that  our  ministers  and 
laity  will  vindicate  their  rights  as  American  Lutherans,  and 
not  suffer  themselves  to  be  deprived  of  their  Protestant  lib- 
erties, by  the  influence  of  old  Lutherans,  who  have  not  yet 
been  amongst  us  long  enough  to  appreciate  either  our  civil 
or  religious  institutions.  American  Lutheranism  grew  out 
of  the  Lutheran  predilections  of  our  fathers,  the  unrestricted 
liberty  of  following  the  scriptures,  which  they  enjoyed  in 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN     CHURCH.  245 

this  "Western  world,  and  the  influence  of  our  free'  civil  insti- 
tutions. Under  this  joint  influence  they  gradually  rejected 
the  symbolical  bondage  of  Germany,  and  restored  the  oiig- 
inal  liberty  in  fundamentals,  which  Christ  and  his  apostles 
bequeathed  to  us.  They  bought  this  liberty  at  the  price  of 
great  sacrifices  ;  and  shall  their  American  sons,  that  were 
"born  free,"  suffer  it  to  be  taken  from  them?  As  the  elder 
fathers  who  participated  in  the  organization  of  the  General 
Synod,  have  nearly  all  passed  from  the  stage,  we  regarded 
it  due  to  them  and  to  the  interests  of  truth,  to  contribute  our 
mite  to  prevent  the  future  misapprehension  of  their  doctrinal 
position,  as  well  as  their  views  and  motives  in  organ- 
izing the  General  Synod,  Many  of  the  relevant  documents 
also  have  become  exceedingly  rare,  and  a  few  years  more 
will  sweep  many  of  these  into  oblivion.  As  we  have  for 
thirty  years  done  in  regard  to  the  Lutheran  church,  what 
the  earliest  Christian  historian,  Eusebius,  tells  us,  he  did  in 
regard  to  the  church  of  the  earlier  ages,  namely,  collected 
all  the  documents  we  could  find  ;  it  seemed  desirable  that 
the  testimony  contained  in  them  on  the  points  at  issue,  should 
be  made  available  to  the  present  generation  of  Lutherans. 
We  have,  therefore,  spread  before  the  church  all  the  princi- 
pal facts  in  the  case,  and  some  of  the  reasons  which  led  the 
General  Synod  to  assume  the  enlightened  and  liberal,  apos- 
tolic ground  which  she  occupies  ;  and  our  confidence  in  the 
intelligence  and  enlightened  piety  of  our  ministers  and  laity 
is  too  strong  to  countenance  a  doubt,  that  under  the  guid- 
ance of  the  good  Spirit  of  our  God,  they  will  manfully  main- 
tain their  ground.  If  our  old  Lutheran  brethren  are  willing 
to  regard  their  peculiarities  as  non-essential,  and  live  in 
peace  with  us,  they  are  welcome  to  take  part  with  us  in  our 
ministry  and  ecclesiastical  organizations  ;  but  if  they  cannot 
refrain  from  either  regarding  or  denouncing  us  as  dishonest, 
and  pseudo  Lutherans,  and  perjured,  because  wre  do  not  be- 
lieve every  thing  contained  in  confessions  which  we  never 
adopted,  and  because  we  will  not  adopt  books  as  symbolical, 
which  contain  numerous  errors  and  Romish  superstitions;  < 
for  ourselves,  whilst  we  wish  them  well  as  individuals,  we 
desire  no  ecclesiastical  communion  with  them,  either  in  our 
Synods,  or  General  Synod  ;  and  believe  it  will  be  for  the 
furtherance  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  that  they  should  be 
21a 


246  AMERICAN    LUTHERAN    CHURCH. 

associated  with  those  who  share  their  intolerance  and  big- 
otry. In  less  than  twenty  years  they  will  themselves  see 
their  error,  and  change  their  position,  and  their  children 
will  be  worthy  members  of  our  American  Lutheran  Church. 


VI.    DISCOURSE. 


VOCATION   OF  THE  AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH. 


The  term  vocation  (vocatio)  has,  from  time  immemorial, 
occupied  a  position  in  the  nomenclature  of  Systematic  The- 
ology, in  application  to  individual  sinners,  to  designate  that 
invitation  given  to  the  unconverted,  by  the  Holy  Spirit 
through  the  means  of  grace,  to  repent  of  their  sins,  and  ac- 
cept the  offers  of  mercy  on  the  conditions  prescribed  in  the 
gospel.1  But  what  do  we  understand  by  the  vocation  of  a 
church?  To  this  question  we  shall,  in  the  premises,  en- 
deavor to  present  a  generic  solution,  and  then  carry  out  our 
idea  to  its  specific  details,  giving  a  tangible  and  visible  form 
to  the  abstract  conception. 

On  another  occasion,  we  published  our  convictions  on  the 
subject  of  Church  Development  in  general ;  and  arrived  at 
the  following  results :  That  those  points  of  doctrine,  expe- 
rience, and  duty  in  the  Christian  religion,  are  unchangeable^ 
which,  in  the  judgment  of  the  great  mass  of  the  Protestant 
churches,  are  clearly  revealed  in  God's  word,  and  as  far  as 
thus  revealed;  whilst  all  not  thus  clearly  determined,  all  in  re- 
gard to  which  a  diversity  of  opinion  exists  between  the  different 
Evangelical  churches,  are  less  certain,  and  are  proper  subjects 
for  amicable,  fraternal  discussion,  and  progressive  develop- 
ment. The  points  which  this  rule  furnished  as  fundamental 
and  unchangeable,  are  those  enunciated  by  the  Evangelical 
Alliance  of  all  Protestant  churches,  held  at  London  in  1846, 

(1)  Thus  Calovius :  Vocatio  ad  ecclesiam  est  infidelium  extra  ecclesiam. 
positorum  ad  ecclesiam  per  verbum.  et  sacraiuenta  a  Deo  ex  gratia  dispen- 
sata,  efiicax  adductio. 


248  VOCATION    OF    THE 

and  re-affirmed  by  the  Synod  of  our  church  in  Maryland, 
namely:  1,  The  divine  inspiration,  authority,  and  suffi- 
ciency of  the  Holy  Scriptures;  2,  the  right  and  duty  of 
private  judgment  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures; 
3,  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  and  the  Trinity  of  Persons 
therein ;  4,  the  utter  depravity  of  human  nature  in  conse- 
quence of  the  fall ;  5,  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God, 
his  work  of  atonement  for  sinners  of  mankind,  and  his  me- 
diatorial intercession  and  reign ;  6,  the  justification  of  the 
sinner  by  faith  alone ;  7,  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in 
the  conversion  and  sanctification  of  the  sinner ;  8,  the  di- 
vine institution  of  the  Christian  ministry,  and  the  obligation 
and  perpetuity  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper ;  and  9, 
the  immortality  of  the  soul,  and  the  judgment  of  the  world 
by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  with  the  eternal  blessedness  of 
the  righteous,  and  eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked.  These 
fundamentals  stand  acknowledged  by  Protestant  Christen- 
dom, as  so  many  imperishable  pillars  of  the  church.  They 
constitute  a  zone  of  light  encircling  this  glorious  edifice, 
seen  and  admired  by  all,  who  do  not  close  their  eyes  on  its 
benignant  rays.  On  the  other  hand,  wTe  maintained,  that 
the  appropriate  and  extensive  field  for  church  development, 
lies  only  in  nonfundamentals,  in  points  not  clearly  deter- 
mined in  the  records  of  inspiration;  and  that  within  these 
bounds  the  church  is  developed  numerically,  geographic- 
ally, ritually,  juridically,  exegetically,  theologically,  and 
economically. 

As  the  development  of  the  church  is  confined  to  nonfun- 
damental  aspects  of  truth,  and  to  points  not  clearly  settled 
in  Scripture,  it  follows  that  the  special  vocation  of  every 
portion  of  the  church,  must  lie  in  the  same  field,  and  be  cir- 
cumscribed by  the  same  metes.  It  is  only  in  regard  to 
points  left  undecided  in  revelation,  that  we  can  expect  to 
find  the  lessons  of  instruction  in  the  book  of  Providence, 
inculcating  the  propriety  of  change  or  amendment.  In  the 
progress  of  this  development  in  nonfundamentals,  the  par- 
ticular circumstances  and  incidents  of  the  phenomenal  ex- 
perience of  different  churches,  will  be  found  to  vary.  The 
character  of  the  population,  belonging  to  a  particular  branch 
of  Christ's  visible  kingdom,  may  elevate  or  reduce  the  in- 
tellectual and  literary  standard  of  her  ministry,  and  by  con- 
sequence, that  of  the  ministrations  of  her  sanctuaries.     The 


AMERICAN     LUTHERAN    CHURCH.  249 

institutions  with  which  any  particular  church  started  in  her 
career,  may  have  derived  a  peculiar  character  from  the 
government  under  which  they  were  adopted,  and  from  the 
historic  influences  amid  which  she  was  formed.  Where  ar- 
bitrary power  has  for  ages  ruled  the  civil  destinies  of  a 
people,  the  management  of  her  ecclesiastical,  and  even  do- 
mestic affairs,  will  exhibit  a  correspondent  impress.  Even 
the  constitutional  peculiarities  of  particular  controlling  indi- 
viduals, who  organized  the  elements  thrown  into  chaotic 
disorder  by  the  commotions  of  ecclesiastical  revolution, 
may  be  traced  in  the  creations  to  which  they  give  being. 
Who  does  not  reeognize  the  rigid  disciplinarian  tendency 
of  Wesley's  mind,  in  the  entire  system  of  government  and 
discipline  still  retained  by  that  efficient  and  extended  por- 
tion of  the  church  of  Christ?  Or  the  regal  origin  and 
aristocratic  bias  of  the  Church  of  England,  in  the  strict 
gradations,  and  conservative  tendencies  of  her  episcopal  hi- 
erarchy; or  the  lingering  habits  of  subjection  to  civil  supe- 
riors, in  the  consistories  and  superintendencies  of  Germany, 
notwithstanding  the  strong  Congregational  convictions  of 
her  leaders  as  to  primitive  Christianity  ? 

Whilst,  therefore,  the  grand  vocation  of  all  portions  of 
the  Christian  church,  is  to  conform  their  institutions  to  the 
word  of  God,  and  to  "let  their  light  so  shine  before  men, 
that  they  may  see  their  good  works,  and  glorify  their  Father 
who  is  in  heaven,"  the  history  of  each  individual  cluster  or 
denomination  of  churches,  may  be  peculiarly  adapted  to 
inculcate  some  special  lessons  of  instruction.  The  general 
vocation  of  the  Lutheran  church,  in  whieh  all  other  churches 
participate  with  her,  we  at  present  pass  over,  and  direct  our 
attention  to  special  duties  inculcated  by  Providence,  not  on 
our  friends  in  Europe,  but  on  the  American  Lutheran  Church. 
And  when  we  speak  of  the  American  Lutheran  Church,  we 
intend  not  only  those  Synods  now  connected  with  our  Gen- 
eral Synod,  together  with  the  mother  Synod  of  Pennsylva- 
nia, by  which  the  General  Synod  was  mainly  formed,  and 
to  whose  influence,  numerical  and  theological,  the  Constitu- 
tion of  that  Synod  chiefly  owes  its  enlightened  and  apos- 
tolic features  ;  but  also  all  other  Synods  and  individuals, 
who  have  acquired  a  proper  consciousness  of  their  concrete 
existence  in  this  free  country,  and  who  sympathize  with  the 
circumstances  of  our  times  and  free  institutions.    IS^or  is  this 


250  VOCATION     OF    THE 

designation  applicable  only  to  those  born  in  our  midst,  al- 
though they  constitute  the  great  mass  of  our  church.  We 
are  proud  also  to  number  in  our  ranks  many  excellent  and 
enlightened,  and  some  learned  men,  who  left  the  land  of 
our  fathers,  dissatisfied  with  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  con- 
dition of  things,  and  having  been  conducted  by  the  hand 
of  Providence  to  this  Western  world,  have  not  only  learned 
to  love  the  freedom  and  wisdom  of  our  well-balanced  civil 
institutions;  but  have  also  attained  a  consciousness  of  the 
fact,  that  one  grand  part  of  the  vocation  of  the  American 
churches  is,  to  throw  off  the  shackles  of  traditionary,  pa- 
tristic, and  symbolic  servitude ;  and  availing  themselves  of 
the  liberty  secured  by  the  divorce  of  church  and  state,  to 
review  the  ground  of  Protestant  organization,  and  to  resume 
the  Scripture  lineaments  of  Christianity.  Yea,  we  number 
men  of  high  standing  amengst  us,  who,  under  the  evangeli- 
cal influence  of  our  liberal  ecclesiastical  arrangements,  have 
gradually  cast  off  the  impressions  of  a  perverted  and  neo- 
logical  education,  and  cordially  adopting  the  grand  funda- 
mentals of  Gospel  truth,  stand  forth  in  defence  of  evangelical 
but  enlightened  Christianity :  men,  who  aim  to  improve  our 
church,  not  merely  by  a  recurrence  to  the  principles  of  the 
Reformation,  but  also  by  going  higher,  and  drawing  from 
the  very  fountains  of  sacred  truth  and  love,  whence  the  re- 
formers themselves  derived  those  streams  that  refreshed 
and  enlightened  the  benighted  and  priest-ridden  nations  of 
Europe ;  men,  too  enlightened  and  well  acquainted  with  the 
whole  field  of  theological  science,  to  suppose  that  the  three 
eventful  centuries  since  the  Reformation,  had  made  no  pro- 
gress in  knowledge,  had  reflected  no  light  upon  the  path, 
on  which  the  church  is  to  travel  onward  to  her  appointed 
destiny. 

In  Germany  the  church  is  still  hampered  by  her  relation 
to  the  State,  to  which  the  majority  of  the  truly  pious  un- 
wisely cling.  She  has  thus  been  prevented  from  settling 
down  on  the  improved  results  of  a  scriptural  development, 
which  would  have  dictated  the  separation  of  the  fundamen- 
tally orthodox  from  every  species  of  neologians.  Had  the 
church  in  Germany  been  separated  from  the  State,  and  all 
the  pious  united  into  one  church,  adopting  merely  the  three 
ancient  creeds,  the  Apostolical,  the  Nicene,  and  the  Athan- 
asian,  and  required  a  rigid  bona  fide  assent  to  them,  with  a 


AMERICAN     LUTHERAN    CHURCH.  251 

scriptural  system  of  church  discipline ;  the  divine  power  of 
the  Gospel  would  not  only  have  soon  given  preponderance 
to  this  emancipated  and  apostolic  church,  and  spread  her 
influence  over  the  whole  land ;  but  she  would  actually  have 
possessed  far  more  doctrinal  purity  than  at  present ;  for  now 
every  form  of  heresy,  from  the  mildest  Semipelagianism  to 
the  rankest  Socinianism  and  Deism,  Communism  and  Pan- 
theism, are  found  within  her  pale.  And  should  even  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  Heidelburg  Catechism  have  been 
added,  with  the  express  proviso,  that  any  person  holding 
the  tenets  of  either  of  these  symbols,  or  a  selection  from 
both,  should  be  regarded  in  good  standing  in  the  renovated 
church,  all  insuperable  difficulties  would  have  been  re- 
moved.. A  separation  would  thus  be  effected  between  the 
neologians  and  orthodox,  distinct  churches  would  be  organ- 
ized, and  experience  would  soon  prove,  that  the  neological 
religious  consciousness  sits  too  loosely  on  the  mind,  to  urge 
its  subjects  to  a  voluntary  support  of  their  ministry ;  whilst 
the  friends  of  Jesus  would  there,  as  in  our  own  country, 
in  Eno-land,  and  Scotland,  eive  a  moderate,  though  ad- 
equate  support  to  those  ministrations  of  the  sanctuary,  with 
which  they  believe  their  salvation  closely  connected.  But, 
hitherto,  the  attachment  to  state  establishments,  conflicting 
pecuniary  interests,  and  the  lingering  spirit  of  sectarianism, 
have  frustrated  this  happy  result.  From  the  bottom  of  our 
hearts  we  say,  both  in  regard  to  Germany  and  our  own 
country,  Faxit  Deus  feliciter. 

But  in  our  own  happy  land,  in  which  all  G-an  worship  God 
unmolested,  under  their  own  vine  and  fig  tree  ;  in  this  asy- 
lum for  the  oppressed  of  all  nations,  this  heaven-appointed 
theatre  for  the  free  development  of  man  in  h-is  social,  civil, 
and  religious  interests,  our  church,  standing  on  her  high 
vantage  ground,  should  review  the  past,  carefully  ponder 
the  lessons  it  teaches,  and  maintain  a  position,  which,  whilst 
it  is  firmly  based  on  the  fundamentals  of  the  Gospel,  adds 
only  those  peculiarities  of  our  ecclesiastical  ancestors,  which 
have  generally  commended  themselves  to  the  enlightened, 
orthodox,  and  pious  portions  of  our  church,  and  vindicates 
a  rational  liberty  on  all  other  points.  What  are  the  great 
landmarks  of  this  position,  how  it  can  best  be  secured,  and 
in  how  far  it  has  been  attained  by  our  General  Synod,  are 


252  VOCATION     OF    THE 

points  which  will  be  more  clearly  perceived  in  the  progress 
of  our  discussion. 

I.  Since,  as  eldest  sister  of  the  Reformation,  our  church 
was  Jirst  to  express  the  grand  Protestant  principle  of  exclu- 
sive, infallible  authority  of  the  Bible,  in  antithesis  to  tradition 
and  human  authority,  and  yet  was  prevented  from  carrying 
it  out  to  its  legitimate  sequences ;  it  is  part  of  her  vocation  to 
complete  the  work  so  happily  begun. 

The  sufficiency  of  a  revelation  from  Heaven,  without  the 
auxiliary  light  of  tradition,  is  the  natural  corollary  of  its  di- 
vinity itself.  The  very  reason  which  rendered  the  one  ne- 
cessary, implies  the  invalidity  of  the  other.  If  uninspired 
human  teachings  had  been  reliable,  as  sources  of  new  truth, 
a  revelation  would  have  been  superfluous.  Hence  the  fact, 
that  God  inspired  holy  men  of  old  to  speak  as  the  Spirit 
guided  them,  seems  to  establish  the  insufficiency  of  mere 
uninspired  human  deduction.  But  this  word  of  revelation 
being  admitt-ed  as  divine,  its  own  declarations  must  forever 
settle  this  point.  The  same  inspired  Apostle  who  declared 
all  Scripture  to  be  divinely  inspired,  (dsowsvsog)  and  able 
not  only  to  subserve  some  purposes  of  the  man  of  God,  but 
to  make  him  "perfect,"  thoroughly  furnished,  not  only  for 
some,  but  "for  all  good  works;"  has  also  explicitly  pro- 
nounced the  Holy  Scriptures  competent  to  teach  us  the  su- 
preme and  vital  interests  of  man,  "able  to  make  us  wise 
unto  salvation."  Whilst  he  warns  us  to  beware  of  any  and 
every  teacher,  even  if  it  were  an  angel  from  heaven,  who 
should  preach  any  other  doctrine  than  that  taught  by  him- 
self, (and  contained  in  his  epistles,)  and  whilst  he  pro- 
nounces the  curse  of  God  upon  him ;  the  disciple  whom 
Jesus  loved,  in  the  book  placed  last  in  the  canonical  collec- 
tion, whether  last  written  or  not,  adds  the  fearful  menace : 
"  if  any  one  shall  add  unto  these  things,  God  shall  add  unto 
kirn  the  plagues  that  are  written  in  this  book."  Since,  then, 
it  is  evident  that  God  designed  his  revelation  to  be  as  com- 
plete as  it  is  infallible,  to  be  the  standing  and  only  certain 
guide  to  his  church  in  all  ages ;  we  urge  the  inquiry  upon 
every  ingenuous  mind,  upon  every  true  disciple  of  our 
blessed  Master,  and  especially  upon  ministers  of  the  Gos- 
pel, what  should  be  our  unflinching  determination  on  this 
subject?  Certainly,  that  which  the  noble  minded  Luther 
and  his  Spartan  band  of  coadjutors  adopted,  to  adhere  to 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN    CHURCH.  253 

the  word  of  God,  in  opposition  not  only  to  angels  and  devils, 
but  to  popes,  cardinals  and  councils,  whenever,  in  our  judg- 
ment, they  come  in  conflict  with  this  divinely  authenticated 
voice  of  Heaven.  "No  man  (said  Luther)  can  or  ought 
to  doubt,  that  every  thing  contrary  to  the  commands  of 
God,  whether  it  be  living  or  dying,  taking  a  vow  or  becom- 
ing free,  speaking  or  remaining  silent,  is  to  be  condemned, 
and  by  all  means  to  be  abandoned,  changed  and  avoided. 
For  the  will  of  God  must  be  supreme,  and  must  be  done  in 
heaven  and  on  earth.  Matth.  6 :  10."  And  if  the  profes- 
sions of  any  man  were  ever  put  to  the  test,  Luther's  were 
at  the  memorable  diet  of  Worms,  when  summoned  to  recant 
his  doctrines  before  that  august  court  of  the  empire.  His 
truly  sublime  answer,  synonymous  with  that  of  the  apos- 
tle's to  the  Jewish  Sanhedrim,  and  given  when  he  expected 
it  would  cost  his  life,  has  for  three  centuries  been  the  sub- 
ject of  admiration  to  the  civilized  world:  "Except  I  can 
be  convinced  by  clear  and  conclusive  reasoning,  or  by 
proofs  taken  from  the  Holy  Scriptures,  I  neither  can  nor 
will  recant ;  because  it  is  neither  safe  nor  advisable  to  do 
an}T  thing  which  is  against  my  conscience.  Here  I  stand, 
I  cannot  do  otherwise,  God  help  me !  Amen."  The  same 
principle  he  has  expressed  in  various  parts  of  his  works. 
One  or  two  passages  must  suffice.  "Hitherto,"  says  he, 
*f  all  cases  which  arose  concerning  true  and  false  doctrine, 
were  referred  to  a  council,  or  to  the  Pope  at  Rome,  or  to 
the  universities,  which  were  to  be  umpires.  But  these  are 
not  Gilead,  they  have  misled  and  deceived  us.  But  the 
Holy  Scriptures  pronounce  the  decision,  as  to  whose  instruc- 
tions are  correct  or  erroneous.  For  although  the  Holy 
Ghost  instructs  every  one  in  his  heart,  so  that  he  knows 
what  is  right ;  it  is  still  necessary  to  resort  to  the  Scriptures, 
in  order  to  prove  the  accuracy  of  our  views.  It  is  the 
Scriptures  which  decide  whether  our  faith  is  correct  or  not. 
Therefore,  we  can  look  for  no  farther  evidence,  either  of 
the  fathers  or  councils ;  but  must  adhere  exclusively  to  the 
clear  declarations  of  Scripture."  l  Again,  "  God's  word  is 
the  only  certain  rule  which  cannot  deceive  us."2  Once 
more:  "The  right  of  free  judgment  we  must  retain,  so  as 
not  to  suffer  ourselves  to  be  bound  indiscriminately  by  what 

(1)  Luther's  Works,  Raich's  edit.  vol.  3,  p.  2$4^ 

(2)  Vol.  1,  p.  1854. 


254  VOCATION    OF    THE 

the  councils  or  fathers  have  taught ;  but  "we  must  make  this 
difference :  if  they  have  decided  and  appointed  any  thing 
according  to  God's  word,  we  also  receive  it,  not  on  their 
account,  but  on  account  of  the  same  divine  word,  on  which 
they  rest,  and  to  which  they  refer  us."  '  Here,  then,  wo 
have  a  distinct  avowal  of  the  paramount  and  exclusively  in- 
fallible authority  of  the  Scriptures,  an  avowal  in  direct  con- 
flict with  the  oath  which  he  had  taken  when  he  was  created 
Doctor  of  Divinity,  in  which  he  had  solemnly  sworn  "to 
obey  the  church  of  Rome,  and  not  to  teach  any  doctrines  con- 
demned by  her.,,:i 

And  shall  it  be  supposed  that  he,  whose  sublime  principles 
thus  elevated  him  above  the  fate  of  emperors  and  kings,  and 
cardinals  and  popes,  contended  against  popes  and  bishops 
Only  to  occupy  their  station  himself,  and  wield  a  similar  au- 
thority ?  That  he  who  was  so  evidently  guided  by  the  fear  of 
God,  when  contending  against  the  decrees  of  councils,  the 
authority  of  the  fathers,  and  the  bulls  of  popes,  did  so  in 
order  that  men  should  bow  to  his  opinions  and  make  him  the 
subject  of  similar  idolatry  ?  No,  he  neither  did  so  himself, 
nor  did  others  attempt  it  during  his  lifetime.  It  was  not 
until  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  after  his  death,  that 
not  the  church  or  body  of  believers ;  but  some  secidar  pr'mces 
usurping  authority  not  confided  to  them  by  God,  together 
with  some  learned  and  excellent,  but  mistaken  theologians, 
undertook  to  prescribe  a  doctrinal  test  to  ministers  in  gen- 
eral, and  thus  dictate  to  them  not  only  the  general  and  fun- 
damental doctrines  of  Christianity,  but  an  extended  detail 
of  particulars,  in  one  case  at  least,  commanding  the  belief 


(1)  Idem,  vol.  ix.  p.  631. 

(2)  As  this  oath  is  a  literary  curiosity,  we  subjoin  it  in  the  original,  for 
the  gratification  of  our  learned  readers  :  "  Ego  juro  Domino  Decano  et 
Magistris  Facultatis  Theologise  obedientiam  et  reverentiam  debitam,  ct  in 
quocunque  statu  utilitatem  universitatis,  et  maiime  Facultatis  Theologicoe, 
pro  virili  ^  mea  procurabo,  et  omnes  actus  theologicos  exereebo  in  mitra, 
(nisi  fuerit  religiosus)  vanas.  peregrinas  doctrinas,  ab  ecclesia  damnatas, 
et  piarilm  aurhcm  offrnsivas  noti  doymatisalo,  sed  dogmatisantem  Dn. 
Decano  dcnunciabo  intra  octendium,  ct  manutenebo  consuetudines.  liber- 
tates  ct  privilegia  Theologicce  Facultatis  pro  virili  mea,  ut  me  Deus  aclju- 
vct,  et  Sanctorum  evangeliorum  conditorcs.  Juro  etiam  Romance  ecclesia 
obedientiam  et  procurabo  pacem  inter  Magbtros  et  Scholasticos  seculares 
ct  religiosos,  et  biretum  in  nullo  alio  gyronasib  rccipiam."  Lib.  Statnto- 
raia  facultatis  theol.  Academic  "Wittemberg.     Cap.  7. 


AMERICAN     LUTHERAN    CHUKCH.  2.55 

of  a  doctrine  from  which  Luther  had  receded,  the  ubiquity 
or  omnipresence  of  Christ's  body  !  Yes,  let  it  ever  be  re- 
membered that  Luther  himself  was  no  symbolic  Lutheran, 
and  that  this  wlio'le  system  of  minute  confessional  servitude, 
was  riveted  on  the  church  long  after  Luther  and  Melanclhon 
had  been  translated  to  a  better  world. 

But  although  these  two  distinguished  servants  of  Christ, 
guided  by  their  supreme  reverence  for  the  Bible,  accom- 
plished wonders  in  casting  off  the  major  part  of  the  errors 
and  prejudices  of  their  Romish  education ;  they  did  not  live 
to  complete  the  work,  nor  had  they  power  to  introduce  all 
the  reforms,  the  necessity  of  which  had  become  clear  to  their 
vision.  They  were  therefore  alike  too  wise  and  too  humble, 
to  desire  the  stadium  of  their  attainments  to  be  the  ne  plus 
ultra  of  reform.  Against  the  practice  of  designating  the 
church  of  the  Reformation  by  his  name,  Luther  protested  in 
the  most  energetic  manner,  alledging  it  to  be  a  repetition  of 
Corinthian  sectarianism,  condemned  by  Paul.  "The  Pa- 
pists," says  he,  "may  well  have  party  names,  because  they 
are  not  satisfied  with  the  doctrines  and  names  of  Christ,  and 
desire  also  to  be  popish.  Then  let  them  be  called  after  the 
Pope,  who  is  their  master.  But  I  am  not  and  will  not  be 
any  one's  master."  Yet  it  was  not  only  against  this  abuse  of 
his  name,  that  the  noble-hearted  Luther  protested  ;  it  was 
far  from  his  desire  that  his  writings  should  be  invested  with 
binding  authority  on  his  successors.  "  If  any  person,"  said 
he  in  the  latter  part  of  his  life,  (1539,)  "desires  to  have 
my  writings,  let  him  by  all  means  not  suffer  them  to  inter- 
fere with  his  study  of  the  scriptures  themselves,  but  treat 
them  as  I  do  the  papal  decrees,  and  the  works  of  the  soph- 
ists, that  is,  though  I  occasionally  look  into  them  to  see  what 
they  have  done,  or  to  take  an  account  of  the  history  of  the 
times,  it  is  not  for  the  purpose  of  studying  them,  as  though 
I  must  act  according  to  their  views."  '  "I  have  no  cata- 
logue of  my  works,  and  not  even  all  the  books  themselves, 
and  I  would  much  rather  that  men  would  read  the  Bible 
alone,  instead  of  my  works."  2  And  finally  he  says,  "  Read 
my  books,  compare  them  with  the  writings  of  our  opponents, 
and  both  with  the  scriptures,  and  then  judge  them  according 

to  this  touchstone."  3 

■ , — . — .^ 

(1)  Preface  to  his  German  Works.  (2)  Letter  to  Ursinus.     * 

(3)  L'lther's  Works,  3d  vol.,  p.  256. 


256  FEATURES    OF    THE 

It  is  therefore  the  duty  of  Christians  of  the  present  day, 
and  especially  of  this  favored  country,  where  liberty  of 
conscience  is  our  birthright,  to  act  oh  the  noble  principles 
adopted  by  these  reformers,  and  to  reduce  them  to  practice 
in  those  cases  also,  in  which  their  Romish  education  prevent- 
ed them  from  doing  so.  It  is  the  special  vocation  of  the 
American  Lutheran  church  to  forsake,  as  she  has  done, 
those  remnants  of  Romanism  and  also  those  anti-papal 
superstitions  which  the  church  of  Rome  had  borrowed  from 
the  earlier  fathers,  and  which  the  first  reformers  failed  to 
renounce.  It  is  our  vocation  to  cast  off  all  regard  for  the 
authority  of  the  fathers,  Nicene  and  Anti-Nicene,  Romish 
and  Protestant,  excepting  what  justly  attaches  to  them  on 
account  of  the  intrinsic  force  of  their  arguments,  or  their 
character  and  opportunities  as  witnesses  of  facts ;  for  no 
point  in  patristic  theology  is  more  fully  established  than  the 
numerous  and  serious  aberrations  of  even  some  of  the  ear- 
liest so-called  fathers  from  the  truth  of  God.  Yea,  it  is  cer- 
tain, that  the  whole  of  them  as  a  body  are  not  more  reliable 
as  expositors  of  scripture  than  the  same  number  of  respect- 
able authors  in  the  different  evangelical  churches  of  our 
day.  It  is  our  duty  to  do  as  Luther  did,  to  look  up  through 
the  long  vista  of  antiquity  to  the  era  of  the  apostles,  and 
from  that  high  standpoint  to  form  a  scriptural  judgment  not 
only  of  the  corruptions  of  Rome,  but  of  the  doctrines  and 
practice  of  all  past  ages.  Had  Luther  acted  on  the  princi- 
ples of  many  now  bearing  his  name,  he  would  have  founded 
his  Christianity  and  the  organization  of  his  church  on  the 
basis  of  his  great  theological  favorite,  Augustine.  He  would 
have  selected  one  or  more  of  his  works,  either  that  entitled 
"  De  Civitate  Dei,"  in  which  he  defends  the  Christian  reli- 
gion against  the  heathen,  or  more  probably  his  "Enchiridion 
(or  Manual)  ad  Laurentium,  sive  dejide,  sped  caritate  liber" 
in  which  he  gives  an  account  of  his  doctrinal  views  and 
those  of  the  church.  This  he  would  have  made  symbolical, 
pledging  himself  to  abide  by  its  contents  for  life,  and  bind- 
ing all  who  united  with  his  ministry  to  the  same  produc- 
tion. And  this  church  he  would  have  baptized  as  the  Au- 
ffttstinian  church.  But  no,  Luther  had  not  so  learned  Christ. 
He  could  discriminate  between  inspired  and  uninspired  wri- 
tings, between  the  books  of  God  and  those  of  men.  Whilst, 
Uioreiore,  he  avowed  his  assent  to  the  three  ecumenical 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN    CHURCH.  257 

creeds,  the  Apostolic,  the  Nicene  and  the  Athanasian,  which 
are  confined  to  fundamentals,  and  are  very  short,  he  never 
adopted  as  binding  any  extended  creed,  nor  suffered  any 
human  productions  to  deprive  him  of  that  liberty  conceded 
by  the  word  of  God.  He  continued  through  life  to  improve 
his  views  of  doctrine  and  duty,  by  the  light  of  scripture, 
and  in  the  most  emphatic  language  inculcated  on  others  the 
obligation  to  do  likewise.  That  he  was  intolerant  to  Zwingli, 
and  his  followers,  belongs  to  the  imperfections  of  the  age 
and  of  the  man,  not  to  his  general  principles  of  action. 
Temporum  culpa  fuit,  non  ejus.  And  were  he  still  living 
we  doubt  not,  he  would  hurl  his  denunciation  at  the  intole- 
rant ultra-Lutherans  of  our  day,  as  he  did  at  Carlstadt  and 
Zwingli  of  old,  only,  by  this  time,  in  milder  phrase. 

How  completely  our  General  Synod  has  fulfilled  her  voca- 
tion in  this  respect,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  she  makes 
no  reference  to  the  fathers,  ancient  or  modern,  thus  leaving 
them  all  to  stand  on  their  intrinsic  merits  as  theological 
authority,  and  as  witnesses  to  historical  facts ;  whilst  the 
former  symbolical  books,  after  having  pronounced  the  fath- 
ers fallible,  nevertheless  cite  their  views  and  arguments  in 
multitudes  of  cases. 

II.  As  she  has  experienced  the  baneful  effects  of  transfunda- 
mental  and  very  extended  creeds,  it  is  her  vocation  to  correct  the 
evil. 

We  have  seen  that  Luther  never  desired  any  of  his  publi- 
cations to  be  binding  on  others.  Still  farther  was  any  dis- 
position of  this  kind,  removed  from  the  mind  of  the  unas- 
suming Melancthon.  All  those  publications  of  theirs,  which 
were  afterwards  made  symbolical,  were  composed  and  pub- 
lished for  other  puposes.  How  then  did  it  happen,  that 
these  publications  assumed  so  unexpected  a  character?  The 
true  state  of  the  facts  in  the  case  is,  we  think,  given  by  Dr. 
Kcellner,  in  his  Symbolik.1  "  The  symbolical  books,  (as 
they  are  afterwards  styled,)  were  at  first  merely  an  expres- 
sion of  what  was  believed,  and  afterwards  they  became  the 
rule  of  what  must  be  believed.  But  when,  and  how  this 
was  first  done,  by  public  authority,  it  is  very  difficult  to  de- 
termine.    The  traces  and  evidences  of  it  are  often  fallacious  ; 

(1)  Vol.  I,  p.  106,  107. 

22a 


258  VOCATION    OF    THE 

because  cases  in  which  such  a  subscription  to  a  creed  was 
merely  requested  and  voluntarily  given,  may  easily  be  ad- 
duced as  cases  in  which  the  subscription  was  commanded. 
It  however  appears  to  be  true,  that  some  individual  symbols 
had  so  much  authority  attributed  to  them,  as  to  be  recom- 
mended as  rules  of  faith  and  of  instruction,  and  in  some 
instances  also  commanded,  long  before  the  formation  of  the 
Form  of  Concord,"  (which  was  half  a  century  after  the 
publication  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.)  "Nevertheless 
this  does  not  appear  to  have  occurred  everywhere  at  the 
same  time,  nor  in  the  same  manner ;  nor  does  the  principle 
of  binding  men  to  the  symbols,  seem  to  have  been  a  univer- 
sal and  prevailing  one,  prior  to  the  formation  of  the  Form 
of  Concord  in  1580,  or  before  the  prevalence  of  the  contro- 
versies which  originated  from  its  formation.  But  a  change 
took  place  about  the  time  the  Form  of  Concord  was  com- 
posed, and  on  account  of  its  formation  and  after  it.  Prior 
to  this  time,  some  cases  had  occurred  of  oppressive  coercion 
in  matters  of  faith,  and  of  compulsory  adoption  of  the  sym- 
bols as  a  rule  of  faith  and  instruction  ;  but  afterwards  they 
became  more  numerous."  These  positions  of  Dr.  Kcellner 
sustains  by  numerous  authorities,  which  even  fix  the  precise 
time,  when,  at  different  places,  the  custom  of  demanding 
assent  to  these  symbols  was  first  introduced.  It  seems  evi- 
dent, therefore,  that  the  habit  of  ascribing  normative  or 
binding  authority  to  these  books,  though  in  a  few  instances 
it  was  done  at  an  early  day,  was  of  gradual  growth,  and 
did  not  become  general  for  half  a  century  after  the  Augsburg 
Confession  was  published  and  used  as  an  expose  or  profession 
of  faith,  and  many  years  after  the  death  of  Luther. 

It  was  the  mistaken  impression,  that  a  general  introduction 
and  more  stringent  exaction  of  assent  to  these  books,  and  the 
fabrication  of  another  determining  the  several  disputed  points 
left  free  in  them,  would  secure  peace,  that  led  to  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Form  of  Concord,  and  to  the  imposition  on  the 
church,  of  the  whole  system  of  symbolic  oppression.  Whilst 
we  deny  the  wisdom  and  dispute  the  Scripture  authority  of 
the  political  rulers  of  a  country  to  impose  any,  much  less 
s'Rch  extended  confessions  of  faith  on  their  subjects ;  we, 
nevertheless,  do  not  doubt  the  upright  and  benevolent  inten- 
tion of  the  Elector  Augustus  of  Saxony,  and  of  John  Wil- 
liam, Duke  of  Weimar,  in  ordering  their -principal  theologians 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN     CHURCH.  259 

to  Altenburg,  to  deliberate  on  the  best  method  of  termina- 
ting these  disputes  ;  nor  of  the  Duke  of  Wurtemberg,  and  of 
Julius,  Duke  of  Brunswick,  in  imposing  on  the  distinguished 
James  Andreae  of  Tubingen  and  his  associates,  the  duty  of 
preparing  the  Form  of  Concord,  which  was  finally  adopted, 
and  together  with  all  the  other  symbolical  books,  made 
binding  in  their  territory,  June  25th,  1580.  Nor  do  we 
hesitate  to  concede  the  purity  of  those  distinguished  divines, 
who  cordially  co-operated  in  this  work.  That  diversity  of 
opinion  existed  among  the  followers  of  Luther,  on  different 
points  of  nonfundamental  importance,  is  historically  certain ; 
and  when  his  death  removed  that  restraint,  which  his  per- 
sonal influence  and  energy  of  character  had  imposed  on 
them,  they  gave  free  utterance  to  their  opinions.  A  very 
large  proportion  of  the  divines  rejected  Luther's  view  of  the 
bodily  presence  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  coincided  more 
or  less  with  that  of  Melanchthon.  It  is  also  certain,  that 
their  wily  enemies,  the  Catholics,  were  employing  these 
differences  as  arguments  to  urge  upon  the  Emperor  the 
revocation  of  the  treaty  of  peace  of  1555,  which  limited 
toleration  to  those,  who  worshipped  according  to  the  Augs- 
burgh  Confession.1  This  was,  however,  only  a  pretext,  and 
would  not  have  induced  the  Emperor  to  venture  on  such  a 
step,  until  political  reasons  inclined  him  to  it.  When  this 
contingency  actually  did  arise,  about  forty  years  afterward, 
the  forcible  extinction  of  Protestantism  was  attempted  by 
fire  and  sword,  although  the  Form  of  Concord  had  driven 
from  the  bosom  of  the  Lutheran  church,  the  great  mass  of 
those  who  could  not  embrace  -all  the  peculiarities  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession.  We  strongly  .favor  the  opinion,  that 
the  adoption  of  a  liberal  platform,  by  uniting  the  two  great 
branches  of  the  Protestant  church,  or  rather  by  preventing 
in  a  great  degree  the  schism  itself,  would  have  presented  so 
formidable  a  front,  as  to  have  prevented  the  "  Thirty  years' 
War."  *  , 

But  that  the  adoption  of  the  Form  of  Concord,  and  with 
it  that  unreasonably  extended  symbolic  system,   however 

(1)  The  fourth  article  of  the  treaty  was  in  these  words  :  •'  Attamcn  ceteri 
oinncs,  qui  alteii  p:\Tnominatarum  haruin  binaruni  religionum  (that  is,  the 
Lutheran  and  Catholic)  non  sint  adha-rerentes,  sub  hac  pace  uou  compre- 
hensi.  sed  plane  exelusi  esse  debaut."  For  Zwinglians  and  Calvinists  there 
was  no  toleration  in  this  troaty. 


260  VOCATION    OF    THE 

well-intended,  was  a  mistaken  step,  is  evident  from  various 
considerations.  It  may  justly  be  objected  that  the  Scriptures 
have  furnished  us  no  confession  of  faith,  an  omission  that 
was  certainly  not  accidental,  if  their  inspiration  be  conceded. 
Nor  have  they  conferred  authority  on  any  one,  to  impose 
such  a  yoke  upon  the  church,  or  to  abridge  her  liberty  in 
nonessentials.  The  only  grounds  which  justify  the  adoption 
of  even  a  short  creed,  are  to  exclude  fundamental  errorists, 
those  who  deny  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  or  reject  any  other 
vital  truth  of  the  Gospel,  and  to  produce  uniformity  suffi- 
cient for  harmonious  co-operation.  Accordingly,  during  the 
golden  age  of  Christianity,  under  the  guidance  of  the  apos- 
tles and  their  successors,  the  church  for  three  centuries  had 
no  other  creed  than  that  termed  the  Apostolic  and  then  the 
Nicene  Creed.  It  was  the  opinion  of  the  Nicene  fathers 
who  framed  that  creed,  that  its  specifications  were  sufficiently 
ample  for  all  practical  purposes.  Athanasius  himself  the 
Coryphceus  of  the  orthodox  party  in  that  council,  thus  une- 
quivocally expresses  their  conviction:  "II  yap  s'v  aurrj  qrapa 
<rojv  ifaripuiv  xurcc  rag  Ssiag  ypacpag  o[Xo\oyr}3s7<fu  rfigis, 
avrapxris  £g"t  rfpog  avarpo7r"»]v  [xsv  irarfyg  atfz(Ssiag,  (tug'cufiv  Ss 
rfg  evtfsfisiaS  sv  Xpj^o  fcrgitegJ  (For  the  faith  avowed  in  it 
by  those  fathers  in  conformity  to  the  word  of  God,  is  suffi- 
cient for  the  subversion  of  all  impiety  and  for  the  establish- 
ment of  all  godliness,  and  of  the  faith  in  Christ.)  The 
Emperor  Zeno  also  wrote  an  epistle,  urging  all  the  discordant 
parties  to  unite  on  this  creed,  promising  in  that  event  to 
hold  communion  with  them,  and  added  that  the  church 
should  never  receive  any  other  symbol  than  that  framed  by  the 
Nicene.  fathers?  But  whilst  the  above  named  considerations 
justify  these  brief  summaries  of  faith,  and  a  moderate  exten- 
sion of  them,  so  as  to  exclude  all  subsequent  fundamental 
errorists ;  they  by  no  means  establish  the  propriety  of  that 
vastly  extended  collection  of  symbols  adopted  by  the  Lu- 
theran princes  some  time  after  Luther's  death,  which  deprived 
that  church  of  all  reasonable  liberty  in  points  of  minor 
importance. 

That  our  view  of  the  inexpediency  of  such  extended  creeds 
is  just,  may  also  be  inferred  from  the  circumstance  that  the 
major  part  of  all  these  Lutheran  symbols  was  rejected  by 

(1)  Evag.  Lib.  III.  c.  14.     (2)  Taylor's  Liberty  of  Prophecying,  p.  72. 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN    CHURCH.  261 

one  or  more  of  the  Lutheran  kingdoms,  even  when  they  did 
not  in  all  cases  dissent  from  the  doctrines  taught  in  them. 
Indeed,  as  Dr.  Base  justly  remarks:  "  The  Augsburg  Con- 
fession is  the  only  one  of  them  all,  that  was  received  ihoughout 
the  entire  Lutheran  Church."  Yet  strange  to  tell,  some  of 
our  native  Americans  exhibit  less  love  for  their  liberty  of 
conscience,  than  the  subjects  of  the  regal  and  despotic  gov- 
ernments of  the  old  world  !  I.  The  Form  of  Concord  was 
rejected  by  the  kingdom  of  Denmark.  "The  king,  though 
invited  to  adopt  it,  refused  to  do  so,  by  advice  of  his  clergy, 
who  disapproved  of  it,  because  peace  and  unity  of  doctrine 
prevailed  in  his  dominions,  and  he  feared  its  introduction 
would  create  strife  aud  divisions.  So  bitterly  was  the  king 
himself  opposed  to  it,  that  he  took  the  copy  (decorated  with 
pearls  and  gold)  which  had  been  sent  to  him  from  Germany, 
and  cast  it  into  the  fire."1  It  subsequently  acquired  more 
popularity,  but  was  never  publicly  acknowledged  as  sym- 
bolical.2 The  kingdom  of  Sweden  did  not  receive  the  form 
of  Concord,  nor  concede  proper  symbolic  authority  to  the 
other  symbolical  books,  except  the  Augsburg  Confession.3 
Still  at  a  later  period,  (1593)  the  Form  of  Concord  received 
a  tolerably  formal  acknowledgment,  (ziemlich  formlich  Aif- 
erkennung).4  It  was  also  rejected  by  Hessia,  Pomerania, 
Holstein,  (for  more  than  half  a  century),  Anhalt,  and  the 
cities  Frankfort,  Speicr,  Worms,  Xurnberg,  Madgeburg,  Bre- 
men, Danzig,  &c.5  II.  The  Smalcald  Articles  were  rejected 
by  the  Lutheran  church  in  Sweden  and  Denmark.  In. 
Sweden  the  symbolic  books  generally  are  now  regarded  as 
an  authorized  explanation  of  the  Lutheran  faith ;  yet  the 
symbolical  books  of  the  Danish  church,  lately  published, 
like  those  of  the  Swedish  church  in  1644,  (entitled  Con- 
fession of  the  Swedish  faith,  approved  by  the  council  of 
Upsal  in  1593,)  contains  only  the  so-called  Apostles'  Creed, 
the  Xicene  and  Athanasian  Creeds,  and  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  to  which  the  Danish  Confession  adds  the  Smaller 
Catechism  of  Luther.  Both  these  collections  exclude  the 
Smalcald  Articles.    Guericke's  Symb.  p.  67,  and  his  History, 

(1)  Kolluer's  Svmbolik,  vol.  I.  p.  575,  576. 

(2)  Bauru.earten's  Concordien-buch,  p.  1S4-165.     Mosh,  Eccl&3.  Hist, 
vol.  III.  p.  155,  Dr.  Murdock's  edit. 

(3)  Hutterus  Redi vivos,  p.  116. 

{4)  Guericke's  Symb.  2d  ed.  p.  112-llX    (5)  Kollaer,  p.  577. 


262  VOCATION     OF    THE 

first  ed.  p.  807.  III.  The  Apology  to  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession was  denied  official  symbolic  authority,  by  Sweden 
and  Denmark.  Guericke  sup.  cit.  IV.  The  Larger  Cate- 
chism of  Luther  was  denied  formal  symbolic  authority  in 
Sweden  and  Denmark.  Yet  in  both  these  kingdoms  these 
Catechisms  are  highly  prized,  and  the  Smaller,  if  we  mis- 
take not,  is  used  for  the  instruction  of  youth.  Guericke,  p. 
113.  Here,  then,  we  'behold  the  judgment  of  about  one 
half  of  the  different  Lutheran  kingdoms  and  principalities 
of  Europe,  announced  in  the  most  unequivocal  and  em- 
phatic manner,  in  opposition  to  this  extensive  system  of 
symbolic  restriction ;  given  too  when  these  parties  ivere 
fresh  from  the  scenes  of  the  Reformation,  and  warm  in  the 
principles  by  which  that  glorious  moral  revolution  had  been 
achieved.  Surely  these  .lessons  of  instruction  ought  to  be 
heeded  by  the  friends  of  reviving  Lutheranism  in  Germany, 
and  still  more  by  those  in  this  country  who  were  "born 
free,"  but  some  of  whom,  from  a  zeal  for  Lutheranism, 
sincere  we  doubt  not,  but  mistaken,  seem  disposed  to  sell 
their  birthright. 

Again,  the  infelicity  of  this  Procustean  symbolic  system, 
which  was  completed  by  the  Form  of  Concord,  is  demon- 
strated from  its  having  cost  the  Lutheran  church  a  large  por- 
tion of  her  ecclesiastical  territory,  estimated  at  about  one-fourth 
of  all  her  churches  in  Germany!  It  drove  off  two  numerous 
classes  of  persons,  those  who  believed  in  the  real  presence 
as  Luther  did,  but  with  him  also. rejected  the  ubiquity  of 
the  Saviour's  glorified  body ;  and  those  who  agreed  with 
Melanchthon  on  the  Lord's  Supper,  as  well  as  on  some  other 
topics,  but  wished  to  remain  in  the  Lutheran  church,  a3 
Melanchthon  had  done. 

Had  the  civil  rulers  and  their  theologians  been  satisfied 
with  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  conceded  liberty  on  all 
points,  left  undecided  that  symbol,  the  Reformed  church 
would  probably  never  have  gained  a  foothold  in  Germany. 
In  1580,  when  the  Form  of  Concord  was  proclaimed,  there 
were  but  two  Reformed  congregations  in  all  Germany, 
namely  those  of  Bremen  and  Neustadt.  But  such  was  the 
unpopularity  of  this  book,  that  in  consequence  of  it  and 
other  related  causes,  in  thirty  years  about  one-fourth  of  the 
Lutheran  churches  in  Germany  had  gone  over  to  the  Re- 
formed communion.     If  it  be  objected,  that  the  peculiar 


AMERICAN     LUTHERAN     CHURCH.  263 

views  of  Luther  on  some  points  would  have  been  abandoned, 
if  they  had  not  been  stereotyped  in  a  creed,  and  conformity 
to  them  been  exacted  by  the  civil  authority ;  we  reply,  this 
would  not  have  been  the  case  to  any  considerable  extent. 
But  if  any  of  the  peculiar  views  of  Luther  should  prove 
unable  to  sustain  themselves  in  fair  and  equal  conflict  on 
the  ground  of  reason  and  Scripture,  the  presumption  would 
arise,  that  they  are  destitute  of  scriptural  foundation,  and 
on  Luther's  own  principles,  ought  to  be  abandoned.  The 
exaction  of  the  Form  of  Concord,  however,  robbed  the 
church  of  her  liberty  on  many  points  not  decided  in  the 
Confession  of  Auo-sburs:,  and  thus  drove  thousands  awav 

CD  O7  J 

from  the  Lutheran  communion,  either  because  they  could 
not  conscientiously  adopt  all  the  specifications  of  the  new 
symbol,  or  if  they  did  believe  them,  regarded  it  as  unjust  to 
condemn  their  brethren,  and  eject  them  from  the  church, 
because  of  non-essential  differences  of  opinion.  Indeed, 
had  Luther  and  Melanchthon  lived  at  that  time,  they  would 
both  have  been  excluded  by  this  creed  from  the  church 
which  they  founded,  the  former  for  not  believing  the  ubiquity 
of  the  Saviour's  body,  and  the  latter  for  rejecting  that  and 
several  other  opinions  affirmed  in  it ;  for  as  the  distinguished 
historian,  Dr.  Staudlin  justly  observes:  "This  creed  made 
binding  the  doctrinal  system  of  the  rigid  Lutherans,  which 
went  beyond  the  doctrines  of  Luther  himself,  (welche  selbst 
uber  Luther's  Lehren  hinausgegangen  waren),  and  took 
cognizance  of  all  the  controverted  points,  which  had  previ- 
ously been  discussed."1 

In  confirmation  of  our  position  we  shall  advance  the  tes- 
timony of  but  two  historians.  Touching  the  effects  of  the 
Form  of  Concord,  Dr.  Henke  says  :  "But  the  most  lament- 
able consequence  of  the  book  of  Concord  was,  that  whilst 
the  number  of  new  Reformed  churches  was  constantly  increas- 
ing in  Germany,  (for  previously  there  were  but  two,  namely 
in  Bremen  and  in  Neustadt  on  the  Hardt),  the  mutual  sec- 
tarian hatred  of  both  Protestant  parties  was  visibly  increased, 
their  interests  were  divided,  and  their  mutual  security  jeop- 
arded."2 And  the  celebrated  Lutheran  historian,  Dr. 
Plank,  in   his  excellent  and   able    History  of   Protestant 

(1)  Standlin's  Universal  Geschiclite  der  Christliehen  Kirche,  p.  308. 

(2)  Henke,  vol.  III.  p.  464. 


264  VOCATION    OF    THE 

Theology,  ihus  distinctly  sustains  our  position :  "  This 
alone  could  be  the  result,  and  this  alone  was  the  result 
(namely  of  the  adoption  of  the  Form  of  Concord),  that  not 
only  a  number  of  individual  theologians,  but  also  a  number 
of  whole  churches,  which  had  hitherto  belonged  to  the 
Lutheran  party,  gradually  approximated  nearer  to  the  Cal- 
vinists,  and  soon  formally  and  fully  united  with  them.  In 
the  year  1580,  at  the  time  of  the  publication  of  the  Formula, 
there  were  but  two  churches  in  Germany  that  had  positively 
declared  themselves  for  the  Calvinistic  doctrine,  on  the 
Lord's  Supper.  At  the  close  of  the  century,  however,  and 
therefore  within  the  next  twenty  or  thirty  years,  perhaps 
fully  one-fourth  of  all  the  Protestant  churches  in  the  empire, 
had  given  in  their  full  adhesion  to  this  party.  This  was 
such  a  natural  consequence,  that  it  could  not  fail  to  follow. 
Already  during  the  preliminary  negotiations  which  had 
been  conducted  before  the  publication  of  the  Formula,  on 
the  subject  of  its  adoption,  the  ministers  of  a  number  of 
churches,  as  for  instance  of  Hesse  Cassel,  of  Kcissau,  of 
Anhalt,  and  of  Zweibrucken,  had  declared  in  the  most  pos- 
itive manner,  that  they  never  would  submit  to  having  the 
hypothesis  of  Christ's  ubiquity  forced  upon  them,  either  as 
a  collateral  idea  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Supper,  or  as  a  dis- 
tinctive idea  of  the  doctrine  of  the  person  of  Christ.  Yet 
these  very  churches  in  part  declared  just  as  decidedly,  that 
they  had  every  disposition  to  retain  and  profess  the  true 
Lutheran  presence  of  Christ,  as  contained  in  the  language 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  that  of  the  unaltered  edition. 
It  thus  happened,  and  that  too  in  the  natural  course  of  things, 
that  the  very  party  which  they  had  desired  more  particu- 
larly to  suppress  by  means  of  the  Form  of  Concord,  that 
the  Calvinistic  party,  now  for  the  first  time  obtained  such  a 
footing,  that  the  continuance  of  its  existence  was  secured 
forever  in  Germany."  --.- 

;  Assuredly,  then,  the  fact  that  this  extended  symbolic 
system  drove  from  the  Lutheran  church  in  Germany  one- 
fourth  of  all  her  congregations,  and  was  rejected  by  one-half 
of  the  kingdoms  and  principalities  constituting  the  great 
Lutheran  brotherhood,  whose  history  fills  so  large  a  space 


AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH.        265 

in  the  annals  of  Europe  during-  the  last  three  centuries, 
should  lead  those  amongst  us,  who  have,  without  the  most 
careful  and  extensive  examination  of  the  subject,  eulogised 
this  Form  of  Concord,  to  reflect.  We  know  the  impartiality 
of  Dr.  Plank  has  been  called  in  question,  but  it  is  in  vain. 
The  undeniable  facts  of  history  establish  his  positions.  It 
will  not  be  supposed,  that  all  those  kingdoms  and  principal- 
ities rejected  those  books  out  of  love  to  them,  and  refused 
to  concede  to  them  symbolic  authority  because  they  thought 
them  fully  deserving  of  it.  And  that  they  did  reject  them 
cannot  and  will  not  be  denied.  The  testimony  of  Dr.  Plank 
is,  therefore,  true,  and  facts  will  bear  out  the  distinguished 
historian,  Dr.  Shroeck,  in  his  honorable  tribute  to  the  merits 
of  Dr.  Plank:  "The  history  of  the  Form  of  Concord,  pub- 
lished by  Anthon,  deacon  at  Schmiedberg,  in  Electoral 
Saxony,  is  elaborated  from  the  best  of  sources  with  much 
industry  and  accuracy.  But  here,  also,  as  in  the  history 
of  the  antecedent  controversies,  Br.  Plank  has  surpassed 
his  predecessors  in  acute  penetration  and  impartial  judg- 
ment."1 

That  this  extended  symbolic  system  was  a  mistaken  one,, 
is  further  evident  from  the  fact,  that  it  failed  to  exclude  dis- 
putes and  differences  from  the  church,  even  where  fully 
adopted  ;  and  infused  greater  acerbity  of  spirit  into  those 
controversies  which  occurred.  Who  that  is  acquainted  with 
the  history  of  those  times,  does  not  know,  that  whilst  the 
adoption  and  enforcement  of  the  Form  of  Concord  and 
other  confessions,  decided  what  should  thenceforth  be  re- 
garded as  authorized  Lutheranism  on  many  minor  points, 
which  had  before  been  left  free,  thus  giving  greater  fixed- 
ness and  detail  to  the  symbolical  system ;  it  nevertheless 
failed  to  alter  the  convictions  of  those,  whose  views  it  con- 
demned. Some  of  the  very  princes  and  theologians  who 
had  advocated  its  formation,  were  dissatisfied  with  it  when 
finished.  Such  was  the  case  of  Julius,  Duke  of  Brunswick,, 
and  his  theologians.  "  In  Saxony  itself,''  says  Dr.  Mosheim,. 
"not  a  few  detested  in  their  hearts,  that  Formula  which 
they  subscribed  with  their  hands,  holding  fast  the  doctrines 

(1)  Schroeck's  Kirchengeschichte,  Vol.  iv,  pp.  648,  649.     "Aber  auch. 
hier  wie  in  der  Geschiclitc  der  vorhergehenclen  Streitigkeiten  hat  Herr 
Consist.     Rath  Plank,  durch  eindringende  Scharfsicht  und  unparteiische 
Wurdigung  seine  Yorgangcr  ubertroffen." 
23 


268  VOCATION     OF    THE 

which  they  had  received  from  Melancthon  and  his  friends/' 
On  the  accession  of  Christian  I,  they  aimed  at  the  rejection 
of  the  Form  of  Concord,  the  omission  of  exorcism  in  the 
Form  of  Baptism,  and  in  general,  the  dissemination  of  Me- 
lancthonian  views.  As  to  the  century  immediately  follow- 
ing the  adoption  of  this  extended  symbolical  system,  the 
distinguished  historian  just  cited,  employs  the  following 
language:  "  During  this  whole  century  (the  17th,)  the  Lu- 
theran church  was  greatly  agitated,;  partly  by  controversies 
among  the  principal  doctors,  to  the  great  injury  of  the  whole 
community  ;  and  partly  by  the  extravagant  zeal  and  plans  of 
certain  persons,  who  disseminated  new  and  strange  opin- 
ions, uttered  prophecies,  and  attempted  to  change  all  our 
doctrines  and  institutions.  The  controversies  which  drew 
the  doctors  into  parties,  may  be  fitly  divided  into  the  greater 
and  the  less  ;  the  former  such  as  disturbed  the  whole  church, 
and  the  latter  such  as  disquieted  only  some  parts  of  it."1 
False  as  is  the  charge  of  the  Romish  Stanislaus  Rescius, 
that  the  Lutheran  church  had,  in  less  than  a  century,  given 
birth  to  two  hundred  and  seventy  sects,2  there  is  but  too 
much  truth  in  the  gloomy  picture  drawn  by  that  master  of 
ecclesiastical  history,  Dr.  Mosheim.  Of  similar  import  is 
the  testimony  of  Dr.  Henke  :  "The  Form  of  Concord, " 
says  he,  "much  rather  gave  rise  to  new  cases  of  discord. 
Papal  divines  rejoiced,  and  ridiculed  as  well  this  peace  mea- 
sure, as  the  contentions  which  it  was  designed  to  settle,  but 
which  it  only  aggravated."  Indeed,  the  bare  enumeration 
of  these  controversies,  the  Melancthonian,  or  Crypto- Calvin- 
iatic,  the  Zwinglian,  the  Calixtine,  the  Synergistic,  the  Helm- 
stadian,  the  JPietistic  controversies,  together  with  those 
concerning  the  Ubiquity  or  omnipresence  of  Christ's  body, 
and  the  Hypostatic  union  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ,  and 
many  others,  will  suffice  to  establish  the  position  we  affirm, 
whilst  they  stand  as  lasting  monuments  of  the  futility  of 
extended  creeds,  either  to  prevent  controversy  or  to  pro- 
mote unity  of  sentiment.  Yea,  instead  of  casting  oil  upon 
the  troubled  waters,  this  extended  symbolic  system  did  but 
agitate  the  church  more,  and  divert  her  attention  alike  from 
her  spiritual  growth  within,  and  from  efforts  to  continue 

(1)  Mosheim,  vol.  III.  p.  157  of  Murdock's  ed. 

(2)  In  liia  Tractatus  de  Atheismis  and  Phalarisinis  Evangelicorum,  p.. 
327.     Kocher,  p.  213. 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN    CHURCH.  2G7 

her  extension  without.  The  extent  and  engrossing  charac- 
ter of  these  intellectual  conflicts,  may  be  read  in  the  fact, 
that  on  a  single  one  of  these  disputes,  the  hypostatic  or  per- 
sonal union  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ,  about  two  thous- 
and works  were  published;1  and  that  distinguished  servant 
of  Christ,  Augustus  Hermann  Francke,  was  formally  charged 
with  thirty  heresies !  !  Numerous  other  testimonies  might 
be  adduced,  to  prove  the  augmented  intensity  given  to  these 
controversies  by  the  adoption  of  these  symbolic  books ;  but 
it  is  self-evident  to  every  intelligent  mind,  that  when  a  con- 
troverted topic  is  made  the  subject  of  symbolic  decision, 
and  the  divines  holding  one  opinion  are  in  danger  of  losing 
their  living,  and  of  seeing  their  families  robbed  of  bread, 
the  discussions  will  acquire  a  double  violence  from  the  self- 
interest  necessarily  involved  in  the  result. 

Finally,  the  inaptitude  of  this  extended  symbolic  system 
is  loudly  proclaimed  by  the  fact,  that  even  in  those  coun- 
tries which  did  receive  all  these  books,  not  only  the  neolo- 
gians,  but  the  great  majority  of  those  icho  adhere  to  the  fun- 
damental doctrines  of  the  Bible,  have  renounced  the  symbolic 
authority  of  these  vmtings,  and  regard  them  as  in  many  points 
defective  exhibitions  of  divine  truth.  In  not  a  single  kingdom 
or  principality  of  Germany,  is  unqualified  assent  to  them 
any  longer  required.  On  this  subject,  let  us  again  listen  to 
the  testimony  of  Dr.  Kollner,  Professor  of  Theology  in 
Leipsic,  an  author  whose  statement  of  historical  facts  can- 
not be  successfully  impugned.  In  his  recent  work  on  Sym- 
bolics, he  says:2  "That  these  symbolical  books  actually 
teach  the  doctrines  of  the  Scriptures,  is  confessedly  a  point 
disputed  not  only  by  many,  but  by  a  majority  of  the  minis- 
ters of  the  church."  "  The  truth  seems  to  be,  that  the  prom- 
inent doctrines  of  Christianity  are  undoubtedly  taught  in 
these  symbols,  such  as  the  depravity  of  man,  the  necessity  of 
Redemption  through  Christ,  and  of  pardon  and  justification 
solely  by  the  grace  of  God.  But  these  fundamental  truths 
are  expressed  in  a  manner,  which,  whilst  it  may  perhaps 
accord  with  individual  passages  of  Scripture,  is  inconsistent 
with  its  general  tenor,  and  fails  to  distinguish  the  outward 

(1)  Atqui  hinc  sexcenti,  quid  dico  sexcents,  bis  mille  libri  conscripti 
sant  de  communicalione  idiomatum,  de  unione  hypostatica,  &c  Ela- 
menta  Theol.  Dog.  Vol.  II,  p.  93. 

(2)  Vol.  I,  p.  146 


268  VOCATION    OF    THE 

form  of  the  Revelation  from  its  inward  kernel."  And  again, 
"It  may  as  well  be  openly  acknowledged,  and  affirmed  for 
the  benefit  of  the  church,  that  there  are  hut  few  divines  who 
yet  believe  and  teach  the  views  of  the  symbolical  books ; 
and  of  these  some  are  prejudiced  fanatics,  and  others,  how- 
ever orthodox  they  profess  to  be,  give  their  own  interpretation 
to  these  books."  l  "  Under  these  circumstances  it  is  evident, 
that  these  books  can  no  longer  serve  as  a  rule  of  doc- 
trine:"2 "For  not  only  have  the  rationalists  abandoned 
them,  the  leading  champions  of  orthodoxy  have  also  devi- 
ated from  them,  such  as  Doederlein,  Morns,  Michaelis,  the 
venerable  Reinhard,  Knapp,  Storr,  Schott,  Schwartz,  Au- 
gusti,  Marheinecke,  Hahn,  Olshausen,  Tholuck  and  Heng- 
stenberg."3  That  our  prominent  divines  in  this  country, 
"within  the  same  period  have  done  the  same,  such  as  Drs. 
Endress,  Lochman,  H.  A.  Muhlenberg,  and  the  great  mass 
of  our  divines  now  living,  and  of  our  church  during  the 
last  quarter  of  a  century,  we  fully  established  in  our  Vin- 
dication of  American  Lutheranism,  in  the  Lutheran  Observer 
during  the  past  year.  It  was,  therefore,  natural  that  the 
Synod  of  Pennsylvania  many  years  ago  ceased  to  require  a 
pledge  of  conformity  to  any  of  these  symbols ;  as  we  also 
proved  in  the  vindication  referred  to,  by  the  testimony  of 
two  highly  respectable  divines  still  spared  to  the  church, 
and  as  we  know  personally  since  thirty  years,  when  we 
were  licensed  by  that  body.  Still,  to  be  without  any  other 
symbol  than  the  Bible,  was  manifestly  a  defect,  and  how 
did  the  General  Synod,  believing  it  such,  and  feeling  her- 
self called  to  furnish  a  remedy,  fulfil  her  vocation?  She 
did  it,  we  reply,  in  a  manner,  evincing  alike  her  conscious- 
ness of  the  progress  of  theological  science,  and  the  scrip- 
tural development  of  the  church,  as  well  as  her  respect  for 
her  ecclesiastical  ancestry ;  in  a  manner,  we  venture  to  af- 
firm, that  has  commanded  the  respect  of  all  enlightened 
divines  of  other  churches,  and  has  been  signally  blessed  of 
God  for  her  own  enlargement  and  improvement.  She  re- 
quired unqalified  assent  to  the  Bible,  and  an  assent  to  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  as  a  substantially  correct  exhibition 
of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Bible.     She  did  it  by 

(1)  Vol.  I.,  p.  148. 

(2)  Kollner,  p.  147. 

(3)  Idem,  p.  121. 


AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH.       269 

establishing  her  Theological  Seminary  on  the  same  doctrinal 
basis,  not  for  the  purpose  of  teaching  the  symbolic  system 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  for  her  leading  members  had  all 
relinquished  some  of  its  features ;  but  as  her  Constitution, 
adopted  in  1825,  just  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago,  explicitly 
declares,  to  prepare  men  to  teach,  not  all  the  doctrines  or 
aspects  of  doctrine  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  but  the 
" 'fundamental  doctrines;"  and  not  those  aspects  of  doctrine 
which  might  be  considered  fundamental  peculiarities  of  that 
Confession,  but  "the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Scrip- 
tures;" those  aspects  of  doctrine  which  Christians  generally 
regard  as  fundamental  truths  of  the  word  of  God.  Or, 
as  the  same  idea  is  expressed  in  another  clause  of  that  Con- 
stitution, the  design  of  the  General  Synod  in  establishing 
her  Seminary  at  Gettysburg,  was,  "to  furnish  the  church 
with  pastors,  who  sincerely  believe,  and  cordially  approve 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  they  are  funda- 
mentally taught  in  the  Augsburg  Confession." 

Such  is  the  enlightened  position  of  the  General  Synod  of 
our  church.  Af.er  ages  will,  we  doubt  not,  bestow  upon  her 
that  tribute  of  admiration,  which  leading  spirits  in  all  denom- 
inations now  concede  to  her ;  but  which  some  of  her  own 
beloved  and  esteemed  sons  seem  unable  to  appreciate.  And 
here  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  utter  a  few  words  in  reply  to 
some  strictures  on  Theological  Seminaries  by  a  recent  writer 
on  Church- Feeling.  If,  as  his  previous  mention  of  Pennsyl- 
vania College  renders  probable,  he  refers  to  the  Theological 
Seminary  in  the  same  place,  we  reply  that  undoubtedly  the 
symbolical  books  of  any  institution  and  church,  should  be 
taught  by  those  connected  with  them  ;  and  this  we  are  hap- 
py to  know  is  faithfully  done  in  our  Institution.  We  would 
also  remind  that  writer  of  what  he  seems  to  have  forgotten, 
that  the  symbolical  books  of  any  institution,  Synod,  or  Gen- 
eral Synod,  are  those  books  which  they  have  adopted,  and 
avowe  1  as  their  rule  of  faith  ;  and  that  the  symbolical  books 
of  the  General  Synod  and  the  Seminary  at  Gettysburg  are 
the  Bible,  and  the  Augsburg  Confession,  as  a  substantially 
corred  exhibition  of  the  fundamental  truths  of  the  Bible.  To 
this  the  professorial  oath  of  office  in  the  Seminary  adds  a 
similar  fundament  d  assent  to  the  two  Catechisms  of  Luther. 
This  doctrinal  basis  of  the  Seminary  is  secured  from  change 
by  legislative  charter,  and  by  provision  for  appeal  to  the  Su- 
23a 


270  VOCATION    OF    THE 

preme  Judiciary  of  the  State.  Now,  these  doctrines  always 
have  been  and  still  are  fully  and  faithfully  taught  in  this 
Institution.  The  Professors  believe  and  teach  the  same 
doctrines  now  which  they  have  taught  for  thirty  years,  and  for 
the  purpose  of  teaching  which  they  were  elected  to  their  pres- 
ent important  stations  ;  and  we  may  add,  the  very  same 
doctrines,  which  that  writer  himself  has  preached  for  twen- 
ty years  and  still  preaches  !  For  them  to  inculcate  on  their 
students  the  obsolete  views  of  the  old  Lutherans,  contained 
in  the  former  symbols  of  the  church  in  some  parts  of  Ger- 
many, such  as  exorcism,  the  real  presence  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  in  the  eucharist,  private  confession,  baptismal 
regeneration,  immersion  in  baptism,  as  taught  in  Luther  s 
Larger  Catechism,  &c,  would  be  to  betray  the  confidence 
of  those  who  elected  them  to  office,  and  to  defeat  the  design 
of  the  Institution,  not  one  dollar  of  whose  funds  was  con- 
tributed by  Synods  or  individuals  professing  these  views. 
Nor  is  it  correct,  if  our  institution  be  intended  that  the  views 
of  individuals  and  not  of  the  church  are  taught  in  it.  The 
doctrines  taught  are  substantially  those  presented  in  the 
Popular  Theology,  and  that  these  are  the  prevailing  views 
of  our  church  in  America,  we  clearly  established  in  different 
articles  on  American  Lutheranism,1  during  the  last  year. 
We  now  merely  add  the  testimony  of  two  respectable  divines, 
then  omitted.  The  first  is  the  Rev.  Dr.  Morris,  who  is  ex- 
tensively acquainted  with  the  views  of  our  church,  and  in  his 
Introduction  to  Dr.  Kurtz's  "Why  are  you  a  Lutheran,** 
affirms  :  "Dr.  Schmucker's  valuable  Popular  Theology  has 
contributed  much  to  remove  wrong  impressions  from  the 
minds  of  many  intelligent  readers,  and  the  Lutheran  Obser- 
ver with  its  extensive  circulation  still  continues  to  exhibit  us 
in  a  true  light."  The  other  is  Rev.  Dr.  Baugher,  President 
of  Pennsylvania  College.  With  the  exception  of  several 
minor  shades  of  doctrine,  in  which  we  are  more  symbolic  than 
he,  we  could  not  ourselves,  in  so  few  words,  give  a  better 
description  of  the  views  taught  in  the  Seminary  than  that 
contained  in  his  "Abstract  of  the  Doctrines  and  Practice  of 
the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Synod  of  Maryland,"  presented  to 
his  Synod,  in  which  the  points  of  symbolic  differences  are 
disposed  of  in  these  words:  "We  believe  the  scriptures 

(1)  See  Lutheran  Observer  for  1850. 


AMERICAN    LUTHERAN    CHURCH.  271 

teach,  that  there  are  but  two  sacraments,  viz.:  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper,  in  each  of  which  truths  essential  to  salvation  are 
symbolically  represented.  We  do  not  believe  that  they  exert 
any  influence  ex  opere  operato.  Neither  do  the  scriptures 
warrant  the  belief,  that  Christ  is  present  in  the  Lord's  Supper 
in  any  other  than  a  spiritual  manner."  And  again,  "Lu- 
ther's Larger  and  Smaller  Catechisms,  the  Formula  Concor- 
diae,  Augsburg  Confession,  Apology,  and  Smalkald  Articles, 
are  called,  in  Germany,  symbolical  books  of  the  church. 
We  regard  them  as  good  and  useful  exhibitions  of  truth,  but 
do  not  receive  them  as  binding l  on  the  conscience,  except  so 
far  as  they  agree  with  the  word  of  God."  "We  believe  in 
the  reality  of  revivals  of  religion,  and  regard  them  as  a 
source  of  the  richest  blessings  to  the  church."  There  seems, 
therefore,  to  be  no  ground  of  apprehension  as  to  our  Semi- 
nary, since  the  doctrines  of  our  symbols,  and  the  prevailing 
doctrines  of  our  American  church,  are  here  faithfully 
taught. 

With  brethren  entertaining  the  views  of  scripture  doctrine, 
and  the  symbolic  position  here  attributed  to  our  church,  we 
delight  to  co-operate.  It  is  true  several  respectable  divines 
of  our  church  have,  within  the  last  few  years,  devoted  more 
attention  to  these  symbolical  books,  and  urged  others  to  do 
so.  To  this  we  make  no  objection.  We  have  spent  proba- 
bly more  time  in  their  perusal  than  these  brethren ;  yet  we 
shall  be  very  slow  to  believe,  that  after  having  studied  and 
preached  the  Bible  for  fifteen  or  twenty  years,  they  will  now 
suffer  themselves  to  receive,  under  the  guidance  of  these 
symbolical  books,  doctrines,  which,  after  so  long  a  search, 
they  had  failed  to  find  in  the  word  of  God.  Yet  should 
they  even  change  their  views  of  doctrine,  we  can  still  live  in 
harmony  with  them,  if  they  are  willing  to  let  us  continue  to 
teach  in  peace  what  they  themselves  formerly  inculcated, 
and  what  we  have  always  taught,  and  what  we  were 
appointed  to  teach. 

In  view  of  what  has  been  advanced,  the  symbolic  position 
which  the  General  Synod  has  adopted,  in  fulfilling  her  voca- 
tion, may  be  reduced  to  three  features,  viz. :  1.  She  has 
declared   against  the  extended  symbolic  system  of  the  for- 

(2)  The  italics  in  this  quotation  are  ours,  to  show  more  clearly  the  points 
of  agreement. 


272  LOCATION    OF    THE 

mer  ages  of  our  church.  2.  She  has  avowed  the  necessity 
of  a  brief  creed,  to  exclude  fundamental  errorists  from  her 
pale ;  and,  3.  She  has  adopted  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
as  to  fundamentals,  for  this  purpose,  as  well  on  account  of 
its  intrinsic  excellence,  as  its  important  historical  associa- 
tions. With  this,  we  for  ourselves,  are  fully  satisfied.  We 
believe  this  position,  so  signally  blessed  of  God,  to  be  truly 
apostolic,  and  well  calculated  to  extend  the  borders  and 
improve  the  doctrinal  purity  and  spiritual  character  of  our 
church.  Yet  there  seems  to  be  some  few  ministers  even  in 
the  General  Synod,  who  appear  not  to  trust  either  themselves 
or  others,  with  so  much  apostolic  liberty,  though  it  is  much 
less  than  the  church  enjoyed  for  four  centuries,  yea,  so  far 
as  doctrine  is  concerned,  for  a  thousand  years  after  the  apos- 
tolic age  !  If  it  is  deemed  advisable  to  gratify  this  yearning 
after  human  creeds,  we  would  propose  the  adoption  of  the 
following  system : 

1.  The  so-called  Apostles'  Creed. 

2.  The  Nicene  Creed. 

3.  The  Augsburg  Confession,  so  far  as  its  doctrinal  articles 
are  concerned  :  with  one  single  clause  annexed,  stating  that 
its  teachings  on  the  following  doctrines  shall  not  be  regarded 
as  binding,  but  belief  or  rejection  of  them  be  left  to  the  con- 
science of  each  individual,  viz.:  the  real  presence,  baptismal 
regeneration,  private  confession  and  absolution,  "  Ceremo- 
nies of  the  mass,"  the  personal  and  condemning  guilt  of 
natural  depravity,  prior  to  moral  action. 

This  arrangement  would  cover  the  differences  existing  in 
our  church,  and  allow  a  rational  liberty  in  investigating  the 
scriptures  on  these  controverted  topics,  whilst  it  would  exclude 
all  errors,  and  sufficiently  distinguish  us  as  a  denomination. 
It  would  unite  in  harmony  all  portions  of  our  church,  except 
those^  who  not  only  implicitly  adopt  all  the  errors  and  obso' 
lete  views  of  the  symbolical  books,  but  are  also  unwilling  \> 
co-operate  with  such  as  cannot  conscientiously  follow  their 
example.  Even  the  Scandinavian  churches,  recentlv  estab- 
lished in  our  North-western  States,  could  probably  unite 
with  us,  as  some  of  them,  at  least,  whilst  adhering  to  the 
Augsburg  Confession  in  general,  propose  to  reject  some  of 
its  provisions,  such  as  private  confession  and  absolution,  as 
also  some  of  the  usages  of  their  fatherland,  the  wearing-  of 


AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH.       273 

the  gown,  the  burning  of  candles  on  the  altar  by  day,  and 
the  churching  of  women.1  "  In  short,  they  propose  to  re- 
store the  church  system  to  the  simple,  pure  and  evangelical  po* 
silion,  that  it  undoubtedly  occupied  in  the  times  of  the  apostles 
and  the  first  christians."  This  is  exactly  the  truly  enlight- 
ened, the  exalted  position  of  our  General  Synod.  We 
hail  with  delight  the  co-operation  of  these  noble  Northmen, 
and  of  all  others  who  labor  in  the  same  spirit,  and  bid  them 
a  hearty  God  speed  ;  assured  that  in  that  great  day  the 
inquiry  of  the  Master  will  be,  whether  we  have  conformed 
our  doctrines  not  to  the  writings  of  Luther,  but  to  the  tuition 
of  his  own  inspired  word. 

(1)  See  Mr.  Langland's  political  and  religious  paper,  termed  The  Demo- 
crat, issued  at  Racine,  Wisconsin. 


INDEX. 


Agreement  in  generic  truths,  179. 
America,  different  religious  sects  in,  98. 

"      Lutherans  in.  styled  the  German  church,  44. 

"       settlement  of  Lutherans  in,  57. 

'•'       first  Lutheran  church  organized  in,  57. 

"       an  asylum,  251. 
American  Lutheran  Church  defined.  233,  234. 

"  "  "       characteristics  of.  237. 

"      origin  of,  244.  245. 

"  "  "       literature  and  theologians  of,  74—84. 

**         church,  transplanted  from  other  countries,  91. 
Apostolic  basis,  66,  67. 

"      creed,  68. 
Army,  clergy  in,  24. 
Authority  of  the  Fathers  rejected,  60. 
Augsburg  Confession,  not  wholly  received  by  the  General  Synod,  227. 

"  "         fundamentals  of,  only  binding,  233,  162. 

"  "         symbolical  specifications  in,  181. 

"  "        doctrines  of,  received   by  the   Saltzburg  emigrants, 

183,  184. 

"  "    '    adopted  by  the  Swedes  on  the  Delaware,  185. 

■  "         abandoned,  187. 

"  "         how  received  by  Synods,  202. 

"  •'         essentially  adhered  to  by  General  Synod,  203. 

*'  "         word  of  God  substantially  set  forth  in,  209. 

"  "         not  received  unrestrictedly  by  Synod  of  North  Caro- 

lina, 218. 

"  "         Henkelites'  misapprehension  of,  219. 

"  "         received  on  different  occasions.  157. 

**  "         an  exposition  of  doctrines,  158,  159. 

•'  "        the  only  symbol  received  by  Muhlenberg  and  hia 

associates,  171. 

«'  u        Shober  dissents  from,  175. 


276  i  x  d  e  x . 

Augsburg  Confession,  pledge  to,  not  binding  to  the  other  symbols,  177, 173. 

"  "         candidates  assent  to,  required,  168. 

Augustinian  view  opposed  by  Melaucthon's  theory,  88. 
Auricular  Confession  rejected,  159. 
Awakened  persons,  how  dealt  with,  106. 

Baptismal  regeneration,  241. 

Bible  opposed  to  tradition,  252. 

,    "     assent  to,  alone  required,  189,  159. 

"     the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice,  167,  243. 
Books  referred  to  as  subsidiary  to  the  Bible,  50. 
Brief  creed  of  General  Synod,  271-2. 
Buonaparte's  religion,  66.     Catechism,  102. 

Catechumens  examined  by  the  church  council,  56. 

Calvin  on  the  eucharist,  61. 

Catechism,  Westminster,  193.     Summary  of  Christianity,  193,  194. 

Luther's,  199,  200. 
Calvinism  of  Luther.  85 

Catechetical  instruction.  113,  114.     Opposed,  114. 
Churches  in  Philadelphia  destroyed,  24. 

"      what  they  could  accomplish,  235. 
Church,  state  of  before  the  General  Synod,  29. 

"       development,  248. 

"       Lutheran,  leading  principles  of,  49. 

"       government,  52-56. 

"       infant  membership  of,  54.  55. 
Churches  and  ministers,  number  of,  58. 
Church,  revivals  in,  38,  93. 

"       duty  o?,  to  give  an  exposition  of  her  doctrines,  42. 

"       English  Lutheran  in  Pittsburg,  43,  44. 

"       history  of,  divided  into  three  periods,  14. 

"       in  America,  18. 

"       colonial  era  of,  14. 

"       duty  of  to  adopt  short  creeds,  69. 

"       not  supplied  with  English  preaching,  102. 

"       the  New  Amsterdam,  how  styled,  183. 

"      how  founded,  188. 

"       of  what  it  consists,  190. 

"       Luther's  definition  of,  190, 

"       history,  importance  of,  90,  91 . 

"       progressive,  91,  92. 

organization,  grand  design  of,  93. 

*:       in  Germany,  polemic  character  of,  94. 

"       ideal  membership  of,  162.  m 

Church  Feeling,  reply  to  the  writer  on,  269,  270,  271. 
Christianity,  introduced  among  the  Germans,  46. 
Christian  church,  features  of,  155. 
Change  of  elementary  principles,  47. 
Christ's  spiritual  preseuce  in  the  eucharist,  62. 
Christ's  visible  church,  41. 
Communicants,  requirement  of,  116. 


INDEX. 

Converts  among  the  slaves,  110,  111. 

Corporeal  presence  in  the  euchariat,  179. 

Controversy  between  Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  divines,  83. 

Confession  of  faith  in  the  Lutheran  church,  208. 

Compulsory  assent  to  the  symbols,  195. 

Communion,  preparatory  exercises  to,  64. 

Confession,  private,  relinquished,  63. 

"  "       approved  by  some  of  the  reformers.  64. 

Congregations  choose  their  own  pastors,  49. 
Confession  and  absolution  rejected,  239. 
Creeds  required  of  applicants  for  ordination,  63. 

"    approved,  169. 

"     proposed  for  adoption,  272. 

Deist  reclaimed,  110. 

Development,  church,  247. 

Discord  in  the  church,  182. 

Discipline,  character  of,  32. 

Doctrines  of  orthodox  denominations,  51. 

"       of  Luther  introduced  into  Sweeden  and  Denmark)  57,  59. 

"       of  the  svmbolical  books  rejected,  174. 

taught  in  the  Theological  Seminary,  229,  269. 

"        of  General  Synod,  226. 

"       in  common  with  other  churches,  69,  70. 
Doctrine,  systematic  adjustment  of,  65.  in 

Duty  of  churches  in  reference  to  symbols  and  traditions,  250. 
Duty,  views  of,  194. 

East  Pennsylvania  Synod,  co-operation  of,  30. 

Ecclesiastical  relations,  right  to  change,  189.     Obligations,  159. 

Electicism  of  the  fathers,  118. 

Effort  to  establish  institutions,  34. 

English  churches  joined  by  descendants  of  German  Lutherans,  42. 

"       preaching  by  the  early  Lutheran  fathers,  101- 

"  "  church  suffers  for  want  of,  102. 

Episcopal  church,  Lutherans  reject  the  offer  to  unite  with,  104. 
Episcopacy,  divine  right  of,  104-5. 

Errors  of  old  Lutheranism  destined  soon  to  perish,  245-6. 
Europe,  union  of  church  aud  state  in,  235. 
Eucharist,  Melaucthon's  views  of;  change,  241, 
"        Saviour's  presence  in,  61. 
"        Cranmer  and  Ridley's  views  of,  62. 
"        reformers'  views  rejected,  62,  63. 
"        Lutherans  at  the  present  day,  view  of,  63. 
Europe,  reign  of  infidelity,  66. 
Eucharist,  real  presence  in,  215,  216. 
Exorcism,  retained  by  Luther  and  Mclancthon,  238,  159. 

"  relinquished  in  Saxony.  239;  rejected,  65. 

Excitement,  religious,  through  "Whitefield's  preaching,  96 

fathers,  educational  period  of,  36. 
"       practical  piety  of,  36. 
24 


278  ixdex. 

Fathers  to  be  imitated  only  as  far  as  they  imitate  Christ,  256. 
"       and  symbolical  books,  257. 

"       approve  of  revivals,  98,  112,  113;  labor  among  all  classes,  110. 
"       questions  asked  at  licensure  by  the,  36,  37. 
Fashionable  vices  exposed,  100. 
Festivals,  54,  103. 
First  Lutheran  Synod  held,  21. 

Figurative  meaning  of  the  words,  "this  is  my  body,"  &c,  150. 
"         expressions  of  the  Saviour  on  other  occasions,  151. 
"         interpretation  by  Luther,  126;  objections  to,  127. 
Form  of  Concord,  when  formed,  258;  published,  164;  rejected,  165;  by 

the  king  of  Denmark,  261. 
Fundamentals  of  Christianity,  248. 

Germany,  Lutheran  church  in,  how  affected  by  symbols,  264,  265, 
"        Reformed  church  in,  262. 
"        aids  in  establishing  churches  in  America,  18. 
'■        the  fountain  head  of  Lutheranism,  44. 
Germans,  characteristics  of,  45. 
"       religion  of,  45,  46. 
"      oppressed  by  Romish  intolerance,  16. 
"       destitution  of,  17. 
"      settlement  of,  in  North  Carolina,  18. 
"      integrity  and  benefit  of,  27,  28. 
"       sympathize  with  the  American  Church,  28,  29. 
"       labor  to  perpetuate  their  language,  102. 
General  Synod,  doctrinal  position  of,  160,  161,  257. 
"  "       agreement  in,  212. 

"       era  of,  29. 
«  "       influence  of,  30. 

"  "       how  regarded,  Luther's  catechism,  228. 

"  "       graud  design  of,  232. 

"  "       formation  of,  14. 

Georgia,  first  settlement  of  Lutherans  in,  17. 

Henkel  and  the  Henkelites,  215,  217. 
Henkelites,  anti-Lutheran  doctrines  of,  218. 

Imputation,  doctrine  of,  rejected,  159,  173. 

of  Adam's  sin,  242. 
Inexpedient  of  binding  to  the  svmbolical  books,  182. 
Infidelity,  effects  of,  98. 
Influence  of  Wesley,  249. 
Institution,  why  not  established,  34. 
Instruction  of  the  young,  55. 

Kirchenagende,  the,  26. 

Koinonia,  different  significations  of,  134. 

Laity  unite  in  the  vocation  of  the  ministers,  32. 

Lesson  that  may  be  learned  from  the  review,  39,  40. 

Liturgies  use!  in  the  worship,  54;  composed,  103;  when  used,  104. 

Mterary  and  theological  institutions  of  the  church,  58. 


INDEX.  279 

Liberality  and  christian  union,  249. 

«       of  Whitefield,  18. 
Literal  sense  of  a  passage,  when  to  be  deviated  from,  12o. 
Lord's  Supper,  design,  of,  145-7,  148-9. 
Luther  disregards  his  oi'fical  oath,  195. 

"     opposed  to  his  followers  being  called  by  his  name,  196. 
"    urges  to  the  study  of  the  Bible,  197-8,  59,  255. 
"     Luther  and  his  Spartan  band,  47. 
Luther's  ordination  proved  valid,  47-8. 
"      views  modified  by  Melancthon,  65. 
"       predestination,  66. 
Luther  regarded  as  standard  of  orthodoxy,  60. 

"     opposed  to  tradition — adheres  to  the  Bible,  253-4. 
Lutherans  in  Russia,  57. 

"         in  the  entire  world,  58. 
Lutheran  fathers  not  inferior  to  the  New  England  divines,  39. 
"       name,  whence  derived,  43. 
"      and  Reformed  churches  united,  167,  222-3. 
"      ministers,  literary  position  of,  26,  33 ;  labors,  34. 
"       position  of,  230. 
"       ministers  in  New  York,  15. 
"       church  in  Sweden,  Norway  and  Finland,  73,  74. 
I'jutherans,  for  want  of  English  preaching,  become  Episcopal,  16. 
"        first  settlement  of,  14;  second,  15;  third,  16. 
"        settle  in  Maine.  18. 
"         rapid  increase  of,  21 . 
"        destitution  of,  98;  youth  neglected,  98. 

Mass  retained  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  241. 
Meeting  for  catechization,  55,  56. 
Ministers,  parity  of,  156. 

"        not  bound  to  the  minutiasof  creeds,  67. 

"         bound  only  to  the  Bible,  184. 
Muhlenberg  and  liturgies,  170. 

"        his  manner  of  preaching,  57. 
arrival  of,  19,  20. 

Names  given  to  Luther,  60. 

New  Testament  ordination,  71. 

Nicene  creed,  260. 

No  pardon  to  the  impenitent,  64. 

Normative  authority  of  symbols,  197. 

Oath,  196. 

Obstacles  to  religion,  21 . 

Objections  to  the  ubiquity  of  Christ's  body,  138. 

Old  confessions,  occasions  of,  220. 

Ordain,  passages  in  which  occurs,  72. 

Order  in  worship,  105. 

Ordination,  proof  texts  of,  71,  72. 

Ordination  of  ministers,  71. 

Orphan  house  erected  by  the  Saltzbergers,  17. 

Passover,  institution  of,  143. 


280  ijjoex. 

Pastoral  labors,  108-9. 

Passages  supposed  to  favor  Luther's  view  of  the  Real  Presence,  132-3. 
Pennsylvania  legislature  endows  a  college  for  the  Germans,  27. 
Piety,  decline  of,  25. 

Popular  Theology,  opinion  of  Drs.  Kurtz  and  Morris,  231,  270. 
Preaching,  manner  of,  99,  100,  101. 
"         in  different  languages,  33. 
"         of  Spener  and  hranke — revival,  94,  95. 
Prayer  meetings  encouraged.  37,  38;  established.  106. 

"  "         at  Philadelphia  and  Lancaster,  108. 

"     Lutheran  fathers,  men  of,  107. 

Heal  presence  held  by  the  Reformers,  201. 

"        "         views  held  by  Lutherans  of  the  present  day,  201. 
"         "         rejected  by  all  Protestants,  13*2. 
"         "        and  baptismal  regeneration,  210,  211. 
Reformers  appear,  4G-7. 

"       men  of  extensive  learning,  59. 
Retrospect  rich  in  blessings,  38-9. 

"         preliminary  remarks  on,  11-13. 
Responsibility,  individual,  192. 

Religious  and  ecclesiastical  obligation  not  hereditary,  159. 
Revivals,  Dr.  Kunzell3. 
Romish  sacrament,  validity,  49. 

"      church,  corruptions  canhonized,  48. 
"      doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  125. 

Saviour's  person,  180. 

Saltzburgers,  Balzius  and  Gornau,  settle  among,  17. 
School,  plan  for  English  and  German,  27. 
Scripture,  how  interpreted,  122. 

"        language,  121. 

to  be  searched,  191,  192. 
Smalkald  Articles,  rejected,  165-6. 
Special  conferences,  117-18. 
Sufferings- of  Christ,  86-87. 
Symbolical  book  never  made  a  test  of  discipline,  188. 

"  "      how  regarded  by  Synods,  185-6. 

Symbolic  rigor  relaxed,  157. 
Synod,  constitutions  of,  213. 
Symbols,  extensive  occasions  of  discord,  265-6. 

Tennessee  Conference,  position  of,  216,  217. 

"  "  opinion  of  the  General  Synod,  226,  227. 

Temperance  advocated  by  Muhlenberg,  111. 
Theological  institutions  established,  30. 

Views  of  Luther  and  Calvin,  how  regarded  by  their  followers,  142. 
Vocation,  2-17. 

"Words,  how  derive  their  meaning,  121. 

Young,  education  of,  113. 


Date  Due 

,  L 1 1 

Bitim 

«8fiiia 

r 

*~-     — 

a. 

n^rt^^is^***'* 

► 

3*^ 

f 

J 


' "    ':  "':  ■       "  ■':.  "*:■'•"■  •'  .•  r-v~" 


